{"id":"court_ctb_2032_3","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2032,"sub_number":3,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2023-07-25","title":"Exhibit 3 | 168
L4MKEAS1","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **Exhibit 3**\n\n| 168
L4MKEAS1 | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|\n| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------x | |\n| EASTERN PROFIT CORPORATION
LIMITED, | |\n| Plaintiff, | |\n| v. | 18 CV 2185 (LJL) |\n| STRATEGIC VISION US LLC, | |\n| Defendant. | |\n| ------------------------------x | |\n| | New York, N.Y.
April 22, 2021 |\n| | 9:37 a.m. |\n| Before: | |\n| | HON. LEWIS J. LIMAN, |\n| | District Judge |\n| | APPEARANCES |\n| TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff
BY:
CHRISTOPHER B. CHUFF
JOANNA J. CLINE | |\n| GRAVES GARRETT LLC | |\n| Attorneys for Defendant
BY:
EDWARD DEAN GREIM | |\n| JENNIFER A. DONNELLI | |\n| ALSO PRESENT: | |\n| MELISSA FRANCIS, Eastern Profit Corporation Limited
J. MICHAEL WALLER, Strategic Vision US LLC | |\n| | |\n| UNA WILKINSON, Mandarin Interpreter
LENNY YANG, Check Mandarin Interpreter | |\n| JOSHUA KLEIN, Attorney for Mr. Guo
PETRILLO, KLEIN & BOXER, LLP | |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | (Trial resumed) |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 3 | A couple of preliminary items: |\n| 4 | First, I received an email -- actually, two emails |\n| 5 | last night from somebody informing the Court that the |\n| 6 | proceedings here were being rebroadcast.
First of all, I want |\n| 7 | to ask the two counsel whether they are aware of who's doing |\n| 8 | this.
Apparently, they were being rebroadcast on YouTube. |\n| 9 | Ms. Cline, do you know anything about that? |\n| 10 | MS. CLINE:
I do not, your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, do you know anything? |\n| 12 | MR. GREIM:
No, no, your Honor. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I'm issuing an order this morning that is |\n| 14 | reminding all parties and all participants in this proceeding, |\n| 15 | and all attendees, whether they are attending in person or are |\n| 16 | attending virtually, remotely, that any rebroadcast or |\n| 17 | retransmission of these proceedings is a violation of the court |\n| 18 | order.
It can be punished, and will be punished, by civil or |\n| 19 | criminal contempt.
That's a warning to anybody who might be |\n| 20 | listening to these proceedings.
It also will be placed on the |\n| 21 | Court's docket. |\n| 22 | Second, I've got an objection by the defense to PX 11. |\n| 23 | The objection is overruled, and the exhibit will be received, |\n| 24 | largely for the reasons stated by Ms. Cline in her letter.
The |\n| 25 | question of whether the document is authentic and whether |\n\nL4MKEAS1\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nthere's sufficient evidence, more particularly, the question of whether there is sufficient evidence for a finder of fact to determine that the document is authentic is different from the question of whether I, as the finder of fact, will determine that the document is authentic. 1 2 3 4 5\n\nI find that the plaintiff has sufficiently established that the document is authentic for purposes of it being received into evidence. My ruling should not be understood to reflect a prejudgment as to whether the document is an authentic loan agreement or not; that is an issue that I presume I will address when it comes to the findings of fact.\n\nAnything else from the plaintiff before we get started?\n\nMS. CLINE: Yes, your Honor. I was just wondering if you might do a time check just for expectation setting purposes?\n\nTHE COURT: I'll give you that information.\n\nAnything from defendant?\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, just some housekeeping. Exhibit DX 48, the substitution of counsel document was used with Han Chunguang yesterday. We didn't move it in, but we just wanted to do that this morning. We've conferred with plaintiff's counsel and understand that there's no objection. THE COURT: Is that right?\n\nMS. CLINE: Yes, your Honor.\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
DX 48 is received. |\n| 2 | (Defendant's Exhibit 48 received in evidence) |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Anything else? |\n| 4 | MR. GREIM:
That's all, your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I'll give you the updated time amount. |\n| 6 | For Eastern, Eastern has used six hours and 49 |\n| 7 | minutes.
For Strategic, Strategic has used nine hours and 29 |\n| 8 | minutes.
It appears that we are coming to the end of the |\n| 9 | allotted time for each counsel.
When we approach the end, I'll |\n| 10 | hear counsel with respect to whether an extension is |\n| 11 | appropriate.
My intention is to run all day today.
I'll |\n| 12 | address the issue with respect to Ms. Wang after the testimony |\n| 13 | is over today, and also to finish today. |\n| 14 | Anything else? |\n| 15 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I would just say we fully |\n| 16 | anticipate being able to finish today with hours to spare. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Good. |\n| 18 | Mr. Guo, good morning. |\n| 19 | THE WITNESS:
Good morning, your Honor. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
You're reminded that you are still under |\n| 21 | oath, sir. |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Counsel, you may inquire. |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | GUO WENGUI, |\n| 2 | CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED |\n| 3 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 4 | Mr. Guo, I'm going to show you what we've marked as
Q. |\n| 5 | Exhibit 41.
This is a Wall Street Journal article that was |\n| 6 | written on July 22nd, 2019, about this very case, and I'll tell |\n| 7 | you this is one of the articles that form the basis for your |\n| 8 | own lawsuit against Strategic Vision. |\n| 9 | Do you recall that? |\n| 10 | MS. CLINE:
Objection, your Honor.
At least the |\n| 11 | document that I'm seeing is in English.
I'm not certain that |\n| 12 | the witness can read it.
It's also been excluded, I believe. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Your objection is overruled.
It's not |\n| 14 | being offered, as far as I understand. |\n| 15 | Is that correct, Mr. Greim, you're not offering it at |\n| 16 | this time? |\n| 17 | MR. GREIM:
We are not, your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
The objection is overruled. |\n| 19 | MR. GREIM:
If you could scroll down to -- |\n| 20 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, objection as to the language |\n| 21 | issue, though, as well.
It's in English. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I assume that Mr. Greim will figure out a |\n| 23 | way to show it to the witness either with him reading it in |\n| 24 | English or it being translated. |\n| 25 | MR. GREIM:
Yes, that's what we'll do.
We'll use our |\n| | |\n\n| | 168
L4MKEAS1
Guo - Cross |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | translator we have right here with us to do that. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, do you read any English? |\n| 3 | THE WITNESS:
(In English) No. |\n| 4 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 5 | Q.
Did you have a lawyer named Daniel Podhaskie? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
And he was also the general counsel for Golden Spring |\n| 8 | New York? |\n| 9 | A.
What I wanted to say, actually, is that he's |\n| 10 | Golden Spring's lawyer. |\n| 11 | Q.
And do you see -- and Golden Spring New York is your family |\n| 12 | office, correct? |\n| 13 | A.
So, I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 14 | Q.
Does Golden Spring's lawyer make statements on your behalf? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
And do you recall Mr. Podhaskie stating on your behalf, in |\n| 17 | response to the lawsuit, \"Mr. Guo is the most wanted dissident |\n| 18 | worldwide by the Chinese Communist Party and has been their |\n| 19 | most outspoken and vitriolic critic since his arrival in the |\n| 20 | United States\"? |\n| 21 | Do you recall that? |\n| 22 | A.
Well, I don't know what is written in the article.
I only |\n| 23 | heard the interpreter interpreting, but I know what that says. |\n| 24 | Q.
My question is whether you recall that Mr. Podhaskie made |\n| 25 | that remark? |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 2 | Q.
Let's go up a few more paragraphs. |\n| 3 | MR. GREIM:
I would ask the interpreter to read the |\n| 4 | highlighted section, and I'm going to tell Mr. Guo that the |\n| 5 | interpreter is reading from this article.
She's going to read |\n| 6 | to you in your language. |\n| | |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
I can read? |\n| 8 | (Pause) |\n| 9 | MR. GREIM:
There is no pending question yet. |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
Hang on. |\n| 11 | (Pause) |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, let me suggest to you, I |\n| 13 | appreciate the way you're trying to do it economically, but for |\n| 14 | the purposes of a record, you either will have to read that |\n| 15 | language out loud, or, alternatively, and assuming your |\n| 16 | adversary agrees, you can mark up the exhibit and just put an A |\n| 17 | next to it as what was read, and then that marked-up exhibit |\n| 18 | will be the exhibit you use. |\n| 19 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I think I'll read it, just so |\n| 20 | we can read the transcript and understand it. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 22 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 23 | Q.
The section that the translator read is:
\"Mr. Podhaskie |\n| 24 | said in his statement that 'Certain of Mr. Guo's assets in |\n| 25 | China, valued at approximately USD \\$30 billion, have been sold |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | for pennies on the dollar' by Chinese Communist Party officials |\n| 2 | and that Mr. Guo 'has never taken a penny out of China or |\n| 3 | Hong Kong since he began speaking out' against them.\" |\n| 4 | Now, my question to you, Mr. Guo, is whether |\n| 5 | Mr. Podhaskie made that statement on your behalf? |\n| 6 | A.
I am invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 7 | Q.
Now, Mr. Guo, it's true, is it not, that you have alleged |\n| 8 | the CCP retaliated against you by freezing your assets in |\n| 9 | Hong Kong and on the Mainland? |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
So let me interpret first. |\n| 11 | MR. KLEIN:
Yes. |\n| 12 | THE WITNESS:
I am invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 13 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 14 | Q.
In fact, Mr. Guo, your claim that you have not taken a |\n| 15 | penny out of China or Hong Kong since you began speaking out is |\n| 16 | central to your claim for being a dissident, isn't it? |\n| 17 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 18 | Q.
And, further, you told Dr. Waller and Ms. Wallop, when you |\n| 19 | met with them in the fall of 2017, that you had not been able |\n| 20 | to take a penny out of China or Hong Kong since you began |\n| 21 | speaking out as a dissident, correct? |\n| 22 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 23 | MR. GREIM:
I'm now going to read the very last quote |\n| 24 | in this article, and after I read it for the record, I will ask |\n| 25 | the translator to translate what you view on this to the |\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\nwitness. Okay? THE COURT: No. I think the right way to do it is for the translator to translate what you're saying, Mr. Greim. So you'll have to take it in pieces, let the translator translate what you're saying, and then you'll lead up to the question. MR. GREIM: Well, your Honor, the only thing is I wanted to make a record that the translator was not necessarily saying what I'm saying, but she's actually reading what she sees on the page. THE COURT: You'll read what you see on the page, and then the translator will translate that. MR. GREIM: So we'll do it twice, she'll translate what I say, and then she'll also read off the page to the witness? Because it seems that the translation, if the -- if the question is what does the document say -- THE COURT: That's fine for you proceed the way you had intended. MR. GREIM: Okay. BY MR. GREIM: Q. The document says: \"Mr. Podhaskie denied those allegations and said Messrs. Guo and Bannon 'have a joint mission in regards to China,' which is to 'get rid of the radical cadre inside the Communist Party.'\" And you agree with what Mr. Podhaskie said, don't you? A. I don't recall. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | Q.
And was -- I'm asking today if he agrees with it. |\n| 2 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can I be heard? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 4 | MR. KLEIN:
To the extent that Mr. Guo is being asked |\n| 5 | whether he agrees with the comment that he and Mr. Bannon have |\n| 6 | a joint mission in regards to China, which is to get rid of the |\n| 7 | radical cadre inside the Communist Party, I don't have any |\n| 8 | issue with him responding to that.
To the extent the question |\n| 9 | is whether he agrees that Mr. Podhaskie denied those |\n| 10 | allegations, I'm not sure what that refers to. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Why don't you reask the question, counsel. |\n| 12 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 13 | Q.
Mr. Guo, do you agree with Mr. Podhaskie's statement that |\n| 14 | you and Mr. Bannon \"have a joint mission in regards to China,\" |\n| 15 | which is to \"get rid of the radical cadre inside the Communist |\n| 16 | Party\"? |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
No, let me ask the question a somewhat |\n| 18 | different way. |\n| 19 | Mr. Guo, do you agree with the statement that you and |\n| 20 | Mr. Bannon have a joint mission in regard to China, which is to |\n| 21 | get rid of the radical cadre inside the Communist Party? |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
I don't altogether agree. |\n| 23 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 24 | Q.
Do you agree that Mr. Podhaskie was speaking on your behalf |\n| 25 | when he made those remarks to the Wall Street Journal? |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Do you want to consult, counsel? |\n| 2 | MR. KLEIN:
I just have a question as to whether the |\n| 3 | question being posed is whether he made the remarks, meaning |\n| 4 | specifically what's in quotations? |\n| 5 | MR. GREIM:
Yes.
I'll rephrase. |\n| 6 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 7 | Q.
Do you agree that Mr. Podhaskie was speaking on your behalf |\n| 8 | when he said that you and Mr. Bannon have a joint mission in |\n| 9 | regards to China, which is to get rid of the radical cadre |\n| 10 | inside the Communist Party? |\n| 11 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 12 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you just testified yesterday, did you not, that |\n| 13 | over 99 percent of the Communist Party members are decent |\n| 14 | people? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes, I recall. |\n| 16 | Q.
In fact, I think you might have said 99.99 percent; is that |\n| 17 | right? |\n| 18 | A.
I actually don't recall whether I said 99 percent or |\n| 19 | 99.9 percent. |\n| 20 | Q.
Well, because we have so many people in that party, let me |\n| 21 | ask you:
Do you believe that 99.99 percent of the members of |\n| 22 | the Chinese Communist Party are decent people? |\n| 23 | A.
No. |\n| 24 | Q.
Okay.
So closer to 99 percent, then? |\n| 25 | I don't know.
A. |\n| | |\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\n| 1 | Well, the thing is that I really cannot measure it |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | with mathematics.
Every day, our mantra was to take down the |\n| 3 | CCP and change the structure.
I just cannot quantify that. |\n| 4 | Q.
Mr. Guo, when were your Hong Kong assets frozen? |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, counsel. |\n| 6 | MR. GREIM:
I'm sorry. |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes. |\n| 8 | THE WITNESS:
It is only an adjective that I use. |\n| 9 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 10 | Q.
Mr. Guo, when were your Hong Kong assets frozen? |\n| 11 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 12 | Q.
Were your Hong Kong assets frozen? |\n| 13 | THE INTERPRETER:
Pardon, counsel? |\n| 14 | Were your Hong Kong assets frozen?
Q. |\n| 15 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 16 | Q.
Mr. Guo, I'm going to show you two exhibits.
One is in |\n| 17 | English with some Chinese characters, and the other one is -- |\n| 18 | let's see, I thought we had it translated -- and the other one |\n| 19 | is translated. |\n| 20 | The first document we are displaying is D-126B, and |\n| 21 | then halfway through, the same document has been translated |\n| 22 | into Chinese characters. |\n| 23 | Now, Mr. Guo, I will represent to you that the first |\n| 24 | document, which was not translated, was filed in this case by |\n| 25 | counsel for Eastern Profit, and Eastern Profit stated, in this |\n| | |\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n13\n\n25\n\n### L4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\ncase, in the letter that it attached to this document, that the assets of Mr. Guo and Eastern Profit that had been frozen in Hong Kong were frozen not by the CCP or Mainland China, but by the High Court of Hong Kong (see Exhibit B). This is on Exhibit 126, the main document. 1 2 3 4 5\n\nAnd we've also had that section that was read to you translated into Mandarin, and it's highlighted on the screen that you see before you, which is the second half of Exhibit 126. It's down at page 5 of the document, and it's the last two paragraphs.\n\nCould you take a moment to read that section to yourself, Mr. Guo. 11 12\n\n## (Pause)\n\nA. I finished reading it, but I actually don't quite understand, but I'm also invoking the Fifth Amendment. Q. Well, I don't have a pending question yet, but let me make a record and ask you: Do you agree with Eastern Profit's counsel that your assets were frozen in Hong Kong, not by the CCP or Mainland China, but by the High Court of Hong Kong? A. I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. Q. Now, Mr. Guo, do you understand that Eastern Profit's position in this case is actually being handled by Golden Spring New York under a power of attorney? 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23\n\nA. I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. 24\n\nQ. Do you exercise control over Golden Spring New York,\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | Mr. Guo? |\n| 2 | I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment.
A. |\n| 3 | Q.
Do you exercise control over Eastern Profit's conduct of |\n| 4 | this litigation, Mr. Guo? |\n| 5 | A.
I am invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 6 | Q.
Now, Mr. Guo, you've given many interviews to Mirror Media, |\n| 7 | also called Mingjing, before, haven't you? |\n| 8 | Yes.
A. |\n| 9 | Q.
On an interview in August of 2017, you told the Mirror |\n| 10 | Media host that your Hong Kong assets had been frozen, didn't |\n| 11 | you? |\n| 12 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 13 | Q.
Before we move on, let's go back to the very first page of |\n| 14 | the Chinese version of 126B, which is the order itself. |\n| 15 | There's a line for R1, Respondent 1.
Do you see your |\n| 16 | name there? |\n| 17 | A.
You mean Chinese version or English version? |\n| 18 | Q.
I'm asking you to look at the version you can understand, |\n| 19 | so I'm asking you -- I presume it's the Chinese version. |\n| 20 | A.
What's the question again, counsel? |\n| 21 | Q.
The question is:
Do you see your name in the first line as |\n| 22 | Respondent 1? |\n| 23 | Yes.
A. |\n| 24 | Q.
And do you recall being served with an order from the High |\n| 25 | Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region? |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 2 | Q.
Were you served with this order? |\n| 3 | MR. KLEIN:
Can I confer for a moment? |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 5 | (Pause) |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
I think the record should reflect that the |\n| 7 | witness is conferring with his personal counsel. |\n| 8 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, may I address the Court in a |\n| 9 | way that won't be translated by the interpreter while she's |\n| 10 | occupied? |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Any objection to that? |\n| 12 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, actually.
I think the witness should |\n| 13 | be able to hear what's going to be said. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I could hear you up at sidebar, so why not |\n| 15 | hear you just within the safer way.
I'll hear you, counsel, |\n| 16 | and I'll determine, after I hear you, whether it's something |\n| 17 | that the witness should be informed of. |\n| 18 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, one thing we've considered |\n| 19 | with respect to this invocation of the Fifth Amendment, |\n| 20 | obviously, we didn't know exactly what topics would trigger it |\n| 21 | beforehand, but it's seemingly covering some core issues for us |\n| 22 | in this case.
And so in a civil case, we would be asking for |\n| 23 | an adverse inference.
Of course, the question is establishing |\n| 24 | agency for the opposing party, but even the questions that go |\n| 25 | to agency are also having the Fifth Amendment invoked. |\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\nAnd so I just want to make sure I do everything I can here today, while we still have Mr. Guo, to lay that foundation. And I wonder if there could be some investigation of exactly what the proceeding is or what the threat is that is causing this, so that if the invocation of the Constitution can be tailored more precisely, we may be able to lay some more of that foundation. THE COURT: I'll think about that request, but, meanwhile, you should ask your questions, and we'll take it piece by piece. MR. GREIM: Thank you, your Honor. MS. CLINE: Your Honor, if I may? THE COURT: Yes. MS. CLINE: My understanding is that Strategic's time has just expired. THE COURT: Do you have an application to extend time? MR. GREIM: Your Honor, frankly, I thought the application would apply if we got to the end of the day, but I'm prepared to apply right here. I'm about a third of my way into my cross. We haven't been able to put on our case yet with our witness. We will have plenty of time to get done today. I don't think I've been wasting time. I've been trying to focus on the issues in the case. THE COURT: So, I'll grant the application to extend the time because I think you haven't been wasting time, for the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n### L4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\nmost part, and you have been confronted by witnesses who have denied things that they said in their deposition, forcing you to confront them with their deposition testimony. 1 2 3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n21\n\n25\n\nSo, you may proceed.\n\nMR. KLEIN: Your Honor, after conferring with Mr. Guo, my understanding is he's prepared to answer the last question regarding whether he was served with this document.\n\nTHE COURT: Very well. Thank you, Mr. Klein.\n\nMR. GREIM: Okay.\n\nBY MR. GREIM:\n\nQ. Could I ask for an answer, then, to that question? A. Well, actually, I have never received any of such documents, certainly by the Hong Kong High Court, but, however, I have seen hundreds -- 150 different kinds of such documents online purportedly charging me of being rapist, being killer, and being gangster, but I have never seen an official paper from the High Court.\n\nQ. And, Mr. Guo, in fact, you told Dr. Waller and Ms. Wallop that your assets in Hong Kong had been frozen, didn't you? A. I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. 18 19 20\n\nQ. Let's move forward here, Mr. Guo.\n\nSince 2017, since you've been in the U.S., have you been engaged in any kind of business or occupation for profit? A. I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. 22 23 24\n\nMR. GREIM: I'm going to ask that we pull up\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Exhibit 51, which I believe has also been translated.
And |\n| 2 | let's go to the translated version. |\n| 3 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 4 | Actually, I'm going to first show you, Mr. Guo, the first
Q. |\n| 5 | half of this document, and you will see it's a two-page |\n| 6 | declaration. |\n| 7 | MR. GREIM:
And let's scroll to the bottom, if we |\n| 8 | could, to the signature. |\n| 9 | Q.
Is this your signature, Mr. Guo? |\n| 10 | A.
It looks like my signature. |\n| 11 | Q.
Okay. |\n| 12 | MR. GREIM:
Let's stick with the Chinese version, |\n| 13 | please.
Scroll to the top, if you could. |\n| 14 | Q.
Now, do you recognize this as an affidavit or a declaration |\n| 15 | that you filed in a lawsuit against someone named Hongkuan Li? |\n| 16 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, did you sue Hongkuan Li in the U.S. District Court |\n| 18 | for the District of Maryland? |\n| 19 | Yes.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
Did you file a declaration in support of your lawsuit? |\n| 21 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 22 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I'm not entirely sure the |\n| 23 | Fifth Amendment protects anyone from testifying as to whether |\n| 24 | they made a public filing. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I will hear, at first, a proffer from |\n| | |\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n### L4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\nMr. Klein as to the good-faith basis for the exercise of the Fifth Amendment with respect to these questions, and then we'll decide whether to permit examination.\n\nMR. KLEIN: Your Honor, I think -- I don't have a comprehensive understanding of the circumstances surrounding the filing of documents in other lawsuits that I wasn't involved in. I don't know the precise involvement of my client, I don't know the full context, and to the extent that he's being asked whether he filed particular documents that are speaking documents, that could be construed potentially as an admission to certain things, it could be construed with regard to the extent of his participation or his intent. I just don't have enough information to understand the context surrounding these documents.\n\nIf I had more information, or if the question were perhaps -- there are certain questions that I think he could answer, to the extent that he has personal knowledge, but I don't even know what he recollects about these documents, or what he knows about these documents, or the circumstances surrounding the creation and filing of those documents, and I have not had time to consider what potential implications there are, your Honor.\n\nTHE COURT: Let me ask counsel a question. First, Mr. Greim are you simply trying to establish a foundation for admitting this document? 23 24 25\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. GREIM:
I am. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Is there any objection by Eastern as to |\n| | |\n| 3 | the admissibility of DX 51 as a statement of Mr. Guo? |\n| 4 | MS. CLINE:
May I consult with Mr. Klein?
I |\n| 5 | apologize, your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 7 | (Pause) |\n| 8 | MS. CLINE:
So, on behalf of Eastern, I can say that |\n| 9 | we do not object to its admission. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 11 | Then DX 51 is received as a statement, prior |\n| 12 | statement, of Mr. Guo. |\n| 13 | (Defendant's Exhibit 51 received in evidence) |\n| 14 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 15 | Q.
Mr. Guo, did you accuse Hongkuan Li of defaming you? |\n| 16 | A.
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q.
What was the defamatory statement? |\n| 18 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, may I confer? |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 20 | (Pause) |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Does the witness need the question back? |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Could the court reporter read back the |\n| 24 | question. |\n| 25 | (Record read) |\n| | |\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\nTHE WITNESS: (Through Interpreter) I don't need the readback. I can answer the question. 1 2\n\n| 3 | Well, it is because Hongkuan, on YouTube, over the |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 4 | YouTube channel, over 600 times in his broadcasting talking |\n| 5 | about raping my wife, my daughter, my mother and insulting them |\n| 6 | with words, so that I don't want to go into that, but then I |\n| 7 | need to invoke the Fifth Amendment, but if you have questions, |\n| 8 | I'll answer them. |\n| 9 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 10 | Q.
And so your argument in that case, Mr. Guo, was that that |\n| 11 | cost you business in Hong Kong and on the Mainland, correct? |\n| 12 | A.
I'm invoking the protection of the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 13 | Q.
And you claim that you actually expected another year of |\n| 14 | work into the year 2019; is that correct? |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, I didn't get your question. |\n| 16 | Q.
And you argued that the conduct by Mr. Li cost you another |\n| 17 | year of work into 2019, correct? |\n| 18 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 19 | Q.
Who was the person at ACA who conferred with you about the |\n| 20 | Li posts? |\n| 21 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 22 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you, in fact, were receiving funds through China |\n| 23 | Golden Spring in 2017 and 2018 for work in Hong Kong and on the |\n| 24 | Mainland, correct? |\n| 25 | A.
I'm invoked the Fifth Amendment. |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
And you were hired by ACA in order to make introductions to |\n| 2 | numerous business executives in China and Hong Kong, correct? |\n| 3 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 4 | And you expected to keep doing that into 2019 without Li's
Q. |\n| 5 | defamatory posts? |\n| 6 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| | |\n| 7 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you testified, I think yesterday, that you had |\n| 8 | applied for asylum, and that the application is still pending; |\n| 9 | is that correct? |\n| 10 | A.
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q.
And Lianchao Han assisted you with this application, didn't |\n| 12 | he? |\n| 13 | A.
I don't quite understand what you mean that he helped me. |\n| 14 | Q.
Did he advise you in preparing the application? |\n| 15 | A.
I don't understand the standard of opinion.
What does it |\n| 16 | mean? |\n| 17 | Q.
Did he work on the application with you? |\n| 18 | A.
Well, it is hard to say whether he did help to fill out the |\n| 19 | application or not because he didn't do that in front of me, |\n| 20 | but the thing is that through counsel, through lawyers, perhaps |\n| 21 | they give him some advice that he helped. |\n| 22 | Q.
Is Mr. Lianchao Han -- let me ask you this:
Did he discuss |\n| 23 | your asylum application with you? |\n| 24 | MS. CLINE:
Objection; relevance. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Overruled. |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
No. |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
Mr. Guo, when is the last time you spoke with Lianchao Han? |\n| 4 | Around one and a half to two years ago.
A.
I can't quite |\n| 5 | recall. |\n| 6 | Q.
You texted him just before your deposition in this case, to |\n| 7 | get facts about the case, didn't you? |\n| 8 | A.
I have never spoken to him about this case.
I was very |\n| 9 | angry with him. |\n| 10 | Q.
He advised you on whether to file this lawsuit, didn't he? |\n| 11 | A.
He actually insisted against -- he was insisted of not to |\n| 12 | proceed with this lawsuit.
In fact, I suspected that he may be |\n| 13 | in league with these two liars. |\n| 14 | Q.
Mr. Guo, Sasha Gong introduced you to Bill Gertz, didn't |\n| 15 | she? |\n| 16 | A.
Well, I don't -- I'm not sure that it was she alone who |\n| 17 | introduced me to Bill Gertz.
A lot of people introduced Bill |\n| 18 | Gertz to me. |\n| 19 | Bill Gertz has many connections -- well, first of all, do
Q. |\n| 20 | you know Bill Gertz? |\n| 21 | A.
Well, many years.
In fact, that in China, we all read his |\n| 22 | articles, and we are all his fans. |\n| 23 | Q.
And you know that he has many connections in |\n| 24 | Washington, D.C., don't you? |\n| 25 | That, I don't know.
A. |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
You know him to be what's called a China hawk? |\n| 2 | A.
I know that he was called -- he has a name called anti-CCP |\n| 3 | hero.
I don't know what hawk he is. |\n| 4 | Gertz wrote a book about you, didn't he?
Q. |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, can you repeat? |\n| 6 | MR. GREIM:
Sure. |\n| 7 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 8 | Q.
Gertz wrote a book about you, didn't he? |\n| 9 | A.
I don't know. |\n| 10 | Q.
Did you know that Gertz wrote a book called \"Deceiving the |\n| 11 | Sky\"? |\n| 12 | A.
I know that he wrote a book that is about the anti-CCP.
In |\n| 13 | Chinese, the name was \"Deceiving the Sky Crossing the Sea.\" |\n| 14 | That, I know. |\n| 15 | Q.
Mr. Gertz asked you for an advance on his royalties on that |\n| 16 | book, didn't he? |\n| 17 | A.
You mean I pay him the royalty? |\n| 18 | Q.
Yes. |\n| 19 | The question is:
He asked you for an advance on the |\n| 20 | royalties, didn't he? |\n| 21 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor -- |\n| 22 | MR. GREIM:
I'm just going to withdraw it, so we can |\n| 23 | move faster.
I'll just withdraw that question. |\n| 24 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 25 | Mr. Guo, you introduced Mr. Gertz to William Je, didn't
Q. |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | you? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, did you say that he |\n| 3 | introduced? |\n| 4 | MR. GREIM:
Mr. Gertz to William Je. |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can I confer? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 8 | (Pause) |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, do you need the question back? |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
No.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 11 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 12 | Q.
Mr. Guo, are you aware that William Je then advanced |\n| 13 | \\$100,000 to Mr. Gertz? |\n| 14 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 15 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you told Dr. Waller and Ms. Wallop, in your |\n| 16 | December meetings, that you wanted to eliminate the CCP and Xi |\n| 17 | Jinping; is that right? |\n| 18 | A.
(In English) 100 percent. |\n| 19 | You also told them that Yvette Wang was still a member of
Q. |\n| 20 | the Communist Party, didn't you? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes. |\n| 22 | Q.
And was she still a member of the Communist Party, in fact, |\n| 23 | in December of 2017? |\n| 24 | A.
No. |\n| 25 | So, did you lie to them?
Q. |\n| | |\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo - Cross 168\n\n| 1 | A.
So, what I said to them was that she had been a member of |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | the CCP, but in December 2017 -- in December 2017, she was not |\n| 3 | a member of CCP, in fact, because if you are the member of CCP, |\n| 4 | you do need to pay the membership fee.
And, also, that she did |\n| 5 | not pay for the membership fee, and, also, that she was being |\n| 6 | with someone like me, who is anti-CCP, so she's no longer CCP |\n| 7 | member, your question is a deceiving question. |\n| 8 | Q.
Mr. Guo, do you remember giving a deposition in this case |\n| 9 | in August 2019? |\n| 10 | A.
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q.
I asked you questions, and you swore to the answers under |\n| 12 | oath, under penalty of perjury, correct? |\n| 13 | A.
Yes. |\n| 14 | MR. GREIM:
I'm going to ask the witness to take a |\n| 15 | look at a video of that deposition, which is Exhibit JX 4, and |\n| 16 | this is lines 30, 19 to 32, 2. |\n| 17 | (Video playback) |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
I can't hear.
Are there subtitles? |\n| 19 | MR. GREIM:
There are no subtitles.
You'll hear the |\n| 20 | question from me, his response, and then you'll hear the |\n| 21 | translation. |\n| 22 | (Video playback) |\n| 23 | (Continued on next page) |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | Q.
Mr. Guo, did you give that testimony? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
And it was truthful? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And you intended to release the information from this |\n| 6 | project to people of China via the media; is that right? |\n| 7 | A.
I don't understand. |\n| 8 | Q.
If Strategic Vision had produced what it is you were |\n| 9 | looking for, would you have then released that information to |\n| 10 | the people of China via the media? |\n| 11 | A.
No. |\n| 12 | Q.
I'm going to -- once again we are going to go to JX4. |\n| 13 | THE DEFENDANT:
Your Honor, I would like to confer |\n| 14 | with my counsel, Joanna. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
You can confer briefly.
Is it with |\n| 16 | Ms. Cline or just with Mr. Guo's personal counsel? |\n| 17 | THE WITNESS:
And Joanna. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Do it briefly. |\n| 19 | (Pause) |\n| 20 | THE WITNESS:
So am I going to say something or am I |\n| 21 | going to answer something? |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
No. |\n| 23 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 24 | Q.
So we are now going to show for you, Mr. Guo, this is from |\n| 25 | JX4, your August deposition, lines 207:25 to 208:12.
Okay. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | (Video being played) |\n| 2 | Mr. Guo, that was your testimony on August 2nd, 2019, |\n| 3 | wasn't it? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And it was truthful, wasn't it? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you never identified Eastern Profit to Strategic, |\n| 8 | did you? |\n| 9 | A.
Well, it was actually done by Yvette -- Wang Yan Ping and |\n| 10 | Han -- well, I didn't know, identify Eastern Profit or Han |\n| 11 | Chunguang to this company. |\n| 12 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you were an agent of Eastern for the purposes of |\n| 13 | negotiating the research agreement with Strategic, weren't you? |\n| 14 | A.
I am the agent? |\n| 15 | Q.
That's my question. |\n| 16 | A.
But I have never been an agent to Eastern Profit. |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you acted on behalf of Eastern in connection with |\n| 18 | the negotiation of the research agreement, and your |\n| 19 | representations to Strategic in that role are binding on |\n| 20 | Eastern; isn't that right? |\n| 21 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, would you mind if I repeat |\n| 22 | the interpreting? |\n| 23 | A.
Well, I did not participate into the -- very much into the |\n| 24 | discussion of the research agreement.
All the discussion was |\n| 25 | conducted by Wang Yan Ping and including Han Lianchao.
I never |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | told the company I was representing whoever. |\n| 2 | Q.
Mr. Guo, would it surprise you to learn that Eastern Profit |\n| 3 | has taken the opposite position in this case? |\n| 4 | Not surprised.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
In fact, just a moment ago you referred to Eastern Profit's |\n| 6 | counsel as your attorney, correct? |\n| 7 | A.
Who is representing Eastern Profit? |\n| 8 | Q.
Well, the attorney sitting here to my left -- |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, can you -- |\n| 10 | MR. GREIM:
Can you translate what the witness just |\n| 11 | said? |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
I actually didn't hear exactly what |\n| 13 | he just said.
I was telling him not to speak.
Do you want me |\n| 14 | to ask him? |\n| 15 | MR. YANG:
He mentioned that it was misspoken. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Let me ask you a couple of questions, |\n| 17 | Mr. Guo. |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
You see the lawyer, the female lawyer at |\n| 20 | the first table in the front of me?
Do you see her? |\n| 21 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes. |\n| 22 | (Through Interpreter)
Yes. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
And you referred to her a moment ago, to |\n| 24 | me, by her first name, right? |\n| 25 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
And did you meet with her before your |\n| 2 | testimony today? |\n| 3 | THE WITNESS:
No. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Let me ask a better question.
Before you |\n| 5 | came here to testify, have you met with plaintiff's lawyers |\n| 6 | here? |\n| 7 | THE WITNESS:
No. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
How do you know her name? |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
Well, if it's because prior to this, my |\n| 10 | internal lawyer told me who was going to be present today. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
And he referred to her by her first name? |\n| 12 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 13 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
No. |\n| 15 | You may inquire, counsel. |\n| 16 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, who is the internal lawyer you just referenced? |\n| 18 | A.
Our internal lawyer, and they are not here, and also that |\n| 19 | this is my lawyer. |\n| 20 | Q.
What is the name of the internal lawyer you just |\n| 21 | referenced? |\n| 22 | A.
It was Daniel before.
He was Golden Spring's lawyer. |\n| 23 | Daniel Podhaskie?
Q. |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
He's the individual who told you about |\n| | SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. |\n\n(212) 805-0300\n\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | | Ms. Cline? |\n| 2 | | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 3 | | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 4 | Q. | I'm not going to ask beyond this question, but does |\n| 5 | | Mr. Podhaskie tell you things about this case, Mr. Guo? |\n| 6 | A. | It was, yes, Mr. Podhaskie and my lawyer here. |\n| 7 | Q. | And does he take instruction from you, Mr. Guo? |\n| 8 | A. | No. |\n| 9 | Q. | Does he do things that you ask him to do? |\n| 10 | A. | No. |\n| 11 | Q. | Do you know who he answers to? |\n| 12 | A. | Golden Springs. |\n| 13 | Q. | Who is his boss at Golden Spring? |\n| 14 | A. | I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 15 | Q. | Mr. Guo, do you know who the boss of Golden Spring is? |\n| 16 | A. | The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 17 | Q. | My question is whether only you know, Mr. Guo? |\n| 18 | A. | I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 19 | Q. | Mr. Guo, do you assert that your communications with |\n| 20 | | Mr. Podhaskie are privileged? |\n| 21 | A. | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q. | Does he provide legal advice to you? |\n| 23 | A. | Yes. |\n| 24 | Q. | And does he provide legal advice to you about this case? |\n| 25 | A. | Yes. |\n| | | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Mr. Guo, I'm going to return to Lianchao for a moment.
Did |\n| 2 | Mr. Han discuss with you that the research from this contract |\n| 3 | would be shared with the media? |\n| 4 | We did have a discussion talking about that we will
A. |\n| 5 | investigate and then bringing charges against them in the |\n| 6 | United States if there was investigation results, but we did |\n| 7 | not talk about it in detail. |\n| 8 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you remain -- |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, you must -- |\n| 10 | MR. GREIM:
Oh, sorry. |\n| 11 | A.
And I also mentioned that after the investigation process, |\n| 12 | then we can share it with the media. |\n| 13 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you remained on good terms with Lianchao Han all |\n| 14 | the way up to your August 2019 deposition, right? |\n| 15 | A.
No, in fact, that ever since the incident with this July |\n| 16 | has happened, our relationship was not in good terms. |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Han kept working on your asylum application at least |\n| 18 | through March of 2018, didn't he? |\n| 19 | Well, ever since this happened, ever since this July, I'm
A. |\n| 20 | getting the USB with rubbish in there, that ever since that |\n| 21 | happened, we were not in good terms.
So I don't have the |\n| 22 | recollection at this moment that what he has done to help in |\n| 23 | the asylum case, I don't have recollection. |\n| 24 | Q.
But you did text with him right before your deposition |\n| 25 | for -- to get facts, didn't you? |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 2 | Q.
For the record, we're going to be playing JX4, lines 65:11 |\n| 3 | to 65:17. |\n| 4 | (Video being played) |\n| 5 | That was your testimony, wasn't it, Mr. Guo?
And it |\n| 6 | was truthful? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you are the one who ordered the wires totaling \\$1 |\n| 9 | million to be sent to Strategic Vision on or about |\n| 10 | December 29th, 2017, aren't you? |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, do you want to repeat the |\n| 12 | date for me? |\n| 13 | MR. GREIM:
December 29th, 2017. |\n| 14 | MR. KLEIN:
Can I confer, your Honor? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | (Pause) |\n| 17 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 18 | Q.
Mr. Guo, are you aware that that is Eastern Profit's |\n| 19 | position in this case? |\n| 20 | A.
Can I ask -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Do you need to confer, Mr. Klein? |\n| 22 | MR. KLEIN:
Yes, your Honor, please. |\n| 23 | (Pause) |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Do you need the question back? |\n| 25 | THE WITNESS:
No, I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| | |\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n25\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, we want to make a record here on what we think -- are starting to conclude is not a good-faith invocation of the Fifth Amendment, and I don't say that lightly, but I want to explain why. 1 2 3 4\n\nGolden Spring New York's in-house counsel gives advice to Mr. Wengui, and he gives him advice about this case. Golden Spring New York's in-house counsel is sitting right at counsel table with Eastern Profit. Golden Spring New York is acting in this case as attorney under a power of attorney for Eastern Profit.\n\nAll I'm asking is, is the witness aware of Eastern Profit doing this, and we got the Fifth Amendment. And it's just hard to conceive of what sort of criminal matter might be invoked by this, and as somebody who has looked at all the facts, I can't think of what it is.\n\nTHE COURT: Let me ask you a couple of questions. First of all, is your objective to create a basis for me to draw an adverse inference against Eastern Profit the same as if Mr. Guo was himself a plaintiff in this case?\n\nMR. GREIM: Yes.\n\nTHE COURT: All right. So let me ask you, Ms. Cline, do you dispute that I can draw an adverse inference against Eastern Profit from the invocation of the Fifth Amendment the same as if Mr. Guo was the plaintiff in this case? 21 22 23 24\n\nI'm not saying that I will draw that inference, but\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n### L4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\njust that I can equate the two of them for the purposes of deciding whether to draw an adverse inference? 1 2\n\nMS. CLINE: So, your Honor, my understanding is that the imputation of the adverse inference is based on a number of factors, one of which is akin to agency, as I understand it. And if it helps, I can say that I believe my predecessor counsel in this case has already conceded that Mr. Guo was acting as an agent for Eastern Profit. So that, I wanted to concede.\n\nI don't want to concede that there are other factors in the analysis. I'm just standing here not certain that I'm prepared to concede those, but we certainly would concede agency.\n\nTHE COURT: That is enough for you, Mr. Greim?\n\nMR. GREIM: I think the factors -- I think there are a few different ways to establish it, and there are a few factors. And I have a memo, which is not at my fingertips, but I would say I think it's not quite enough. The concession regarding agency went to the negotiations and the representations made in negotiating the contract.\n\nBut some of the statements that Mr. Guo is not answering arguably aren't part of the negotiation of the contract. They go to things like the performance of the contract or things that establish Guo's control more generally over these parties, and so I'm not sure we're all the way 21 22 23 24 25\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nthere. I think we're very far along the way there, but we might need more. 1 2\n\nTHE COURT: Well, I'll hear from you, but I had understood Ms. Cline to say not just that Mr. Guo was an agent for the purpose of negotiation of the underlying contract, but that with respect to that component of the analysis that I need to do in terms of deciding whether to draw an inference against Eastern by virtue of his testimony, she's conceded that that's been satisfied. But let me hear from you, Mr. Greim.\n\nMR. GREIM: The four factors are Guo's loyalty to Eastern Profit, a degree of control by Guo over Eastern Profit, the mutual interests in this litigation, and that Guo has a sufficiently prominent role in this litigation.\n\nAnd so I think Guo's loyalty to Eastern Profit is established. With respect to the fact that he admittedly negotiated this on its behalf and is clearly trying to aid it in this litigation --\n\nTHE COURT: Let me cut you off, Mr. Greim.\n\nMR. GREIM: Yes.\n\nTHE COURT: So, Ms. Cline, based upon those four factors, are you agreeing that I can draw an adverse inference against Eastern Profit to the same extent as if Mr. Guo was himself a party to this litigation? 20 21 22 23\n\nIn other words, that all four of those factors have been satisfied for the purpose of the adverse inference 24 25\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | analysis? |\n| 2 | MS. CLINE:
May I consult with my client? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 4 | (Pause) |\n| 5 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, we're not prepared to concede |\n| 6 | anything other than the agency point that's already made. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Let me ask you one more question, |\n| 8 | Ms. Cline, and then I'll turn back to Mr. Greim.
A moment ago |\n| 9 | in my courtroom, you conferred with Mr. Guo and his personal |\n| 10 | lawyer.
Are you claiming a privilege with respect to that |\n| 11 | conference? |\n| 12 | MS. CLINE:
Yes. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
On what basis?
Put another way, isn't it |\n| 14 | fair for me to assume that the basis is that he's got a common |\n| 15 | interest between Eastern Profit and Mr. Guo? |\n| 16 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, your Honor, and so he's a -- for |\n| 17 | purposes of this litigation, we are aligned and we have |\n| 18 | consulted about the litigation. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
For purposes of this litigation, you are |\n| 20 | aligned, is that what you said? |\n| 21 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, sir. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
And so you've got a common interest with |\n| 23 | respect to this litigation; is that correct? |\n| 24 | MS. CLINE:
I will agree with that, yes. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, what more do you need?
And |\n| | |\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n### L4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nthen I'll consider the question of what questions you want to challenge the good-faith basis for the assertion of the privilege. 1 2 3\n\nMR. GREIM: Well, your Honor, if they've got a common interest in the outcome of the litigation, I think that's stronger than the mutual interest that the test requires. The witness has a prominent role in the litigation.\n\nTHE COURT: Again, let me cut you off. I don't want to right now make the decision as to whether I can draw an adverse inference and, frankly, whether an adverse inference is appropriate. That will turn upon the questions and what inferences I draw from the questions, and whether Guo is the same as Eastern Profit for the purpose of drawing an inference will depend upon the analysis of the case law. I don't have the case law in front of me.\n\nAll I'm trying to do at the moment is to see whether we need to challenge the good-faith assertion of the privilege. I'm trying to avoid having to do that because I think this Court's understandably expressed reluctance, but if you need to establish more of a record, then tell me what you think you need to do and I'll determine whether you can do it.\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, I think -- let me do this. I think the best thing to do is to simply forge ahead with the questioning and see where this comes up again. I'm just afraid I'll take too long on this topic and I won't get done. 22 23 24 25\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Go ahead.
We'll leave that open. |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
Mr. Guo, when -- did you recall hearing from Yvette Wang in |\n| 4 | late January of 2018 that, in her opinion, Strategic had not |\n| 5 | found sufficient information on the 15 subjects? |\n| 6 | A.
Well, I know that after I met with these two guys, that I |\n| 7 | did not get any information at all.
I don't recall what time |\n| 8 | that was. |\n| 9 | Q.
Do you recall being asked for new names by Strategic |\n| 10 | because there were problems with the first set of 15 names? |\n| 11 | A.
Well, I vaguely recall some such thing happened, but then |\n| 12 | the first time or second time, the names I provided basically |\n| 13 | were Wang Qishan and people related to him.
I don't recall |\n| 14 | anyone else. |\n| 15 | Q.
Do you recall, however, that Strategic Vision asked for new |\n| 16 | names to replace some of the names in the original list? |\n| 17 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 18 | Q.
Do you recall refusing to provide new names to Strategic |\n| 19 | Vision? |\n| 20 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 21 | Q.
Mr. Guo, I just want to make sure I understand.
When you |\n| 22 | say \"I don't recall,\" do you mean you may have and can't |\n| 23 | remember, or that you didn't do it? |\n| 24 | A.
Well, I don't really remember, and just like the two videos |\n| 25 | before you show me, I don't recall, but the thing is I thought |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | that was okay and that was what happened, and but I don't |\n| 2 | recall. |\n| 3 | Q.
Do you know who Han Chunguang is? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
Who is he? |\n| 6 | A.
He's the boss of Eastern Profit. |\n| 7 | Q.
How do you know he's the boss of Eastern Profit? |\n| 8 | A.
Well, that family was very successful in China, had a lot |\n| 9 | of business; so they build this company. |\n| 10 | Q.
Your daughter is the sole director of Eastern Profit, |\n| 11 | though, isn't she? |\n| 12 | A.
I don't know. |\n| 13 | Q.
When did you last see Han Chunguang, Mr. Guo? |\n| 14 | A.
Well, yesterday when I was on the road here that I saw him, |\n| 15 | and then I think several days ago I saw him too. |\n| 16 | Q.
You see him frequently, don't you? |\n| 17 | A.
I don't understand what the definition of frequency means, |\n| 18 | but when I need to see him, I can see him. |\n| 19 | When do you need to see him?
Q. |\n| 20 | A.
Well, there were a lot of things asked about taking down |\n| 21 | the CCP; so when I need to see him, I'll see him. |\n| 22 | Q.
Do you request meetings with him? |\n| 23 | A.
I don't understand what that means. |\n| 24 | Q.
Do you ask him to meet with you? |\n| 25 | Well, it's quite normal and among us all that who are the
A. |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | people supporting the taking down of the CCP that if we need to |\n| | |\n| 2 | discuss or we'll just meet.
There is nothing about who is |\n| 3 | requesting who or who is inviting whom.
We have common |\n| 4 | mission. |\n| 5 | Q.
He comes to your apartment very frequently, doesn't he? |\n| 6 | A.
I believe, in the last two years, that he did not come to |\n| 7 | my place more than ten times or no more than five times. |\n| 8 | Q.
I took your deposition in August of 2019, remember? |\n| 9 | A.
Yes. |\n| 10 | Q.
And you remember you said you had seen him just that |\n| 11 | morning of your deposition? |\n| 12 | A.
I really cannot recall what happened in that deposition.
I |\n| 13 | don't remember. |\n| 14 | Q.
We're playing JX4, page 115, 19 to 22. |\n| 15 | (Video being played) |\n| 16 | That was your testimony, wasn't it, Mr. Guo? |\n| 17 | A.
Yes. |\n| 18 | Q.
And it was truthful? |\n| 19 | Yes.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
But then you testified that you didn't know why Han |\n| 21 | Chunguang came to your building, didn't you? |\n| 22 | A.
I just don't recall what I -- I just don't recall what I |\n| 23 | said at the time.
I may have said that.
I just don't recall |\n| 24 | that now, at this point.
When I'm in court now, I'm just |\n| 25 | telling you what I feel.
At this moment, I don't recall. |\n\n168\n\n| | L4MPEAS2
Kwok - Cross |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
And in August 2019, you said you didn't know who Han |\n| 2 | Chunguang worked for or who assigned him work, remember? |\n| 3 | A.
Well, I just don't recall what I said at that time because, |\n| 4 | like, I have 50 cases.
I don't recall what day and saying what |\n| 5 | and when.
Only I can tell you at this moment I'm in court, I |\n| 6 | don't recall. |\n| 7 | Q.
Okay.
Let's just -- we'll keep pressing ahead. |\n| 8 | Let me ask you this, Mr. Guo.
When did you learn that |\n| 9 | Han Chunguang was the boss of Eastern Profit? |\n| 10 | A.
I don't recall the specific time. |\n| 11 | Q.
Do you recall that I asked you at your deposition whether |\n| 12 | Han Chunguang attended a meeting with Strategic to discuss the |\n| 13 | contract and you laughed?
Do you recall that? |\n| 14 | A.
Well, perhaps I thought, you know, just like before, maybe |\n| 15 | I did say I recalled but that, we can base my answer on that |\n| 16 | one, but at this moment, I don't recall. |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, we're going to play from JX4, line -- I'm sorry, |\n| 18 | page 158, lines five to 15. |\n| 19 | (Video being played) |\n| 20 | Do you recall that testimony, Mr. Guo? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes.
After I watch the video now, that my memory is |\n| 22 | refreshed, now that I recall. |\n| 23 | Q.
And were you being completely truthful and honest to your |\n| 24 | answers to me in that deposition, Mr. Guo? |\n| 25 | A.
Yes. |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Mr. Guo, Han Chunguang is actually your man servant, isn't |\n| 2 | he? |\n| 3 | A.
Who says that? |\n| 4 | That's my question.
Q. |\n| 5 | A.
No. |\n| 6 | Q.
He cooks for you?
Does he cook for you? |\n| 7 | A.
Several times.
Well, several times, but the thing is that |\n| 8 | in the Chinese tradition, men cooking was a virtue, and so we |\n| 9 | cook for each other sometimes as friends and family.
I |\n| 10 | actually cooked on the broadcasting too. |\n| 11 | Q.
And he runs errands for you, doesn't he? |\n| 12 | A.
No. |\n| 13 | Q.
And he has cooked for you when you had guests over and |\n| 14 | served that food to the guests, hasn't he? |\n| 15 | A.
No. |\n| 16 | Q.
Mr. Guo, if you're so sure that Han Chunguang is the boss |\n| 17 | of Eastern -- let me ask you this -- strike that. |\n| 18 | Have you ever talked to your daughter about Eastern |\n| 19 | Profit? |\n| 20 | A.
No. |\n| 21 | Q.
Does she live in the area? |\n| 22 | A.
No. |\n| 23 | Q.
Do you see her very often? |\n| 24 | A.
Very rarely. |\n| 25 | She's in the U.S. though, correct?
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
So if Han Chunguang is the boss of Eastern Profit, why is |\n| 3 | he not sitting here with counsel for this lawsuit; do you know? |\n| 4 | MS. CLINE:
Objection.
Foundation. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Overruled.
I take it he's not at counsel |\n| 6 | table, right?
He's not in the courtroom with counsel? |\n| 7 | MS. CLINE:
That's correct, your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
All right.
There's a foundation. |\n| 9 | Objection is overruled. |\n| 10 | A.
I don't know. |\n| 11 | Q.
Well, you said you saw him frequently.
Do you ever talk to |\n| 12 | him about this case? |\n| 13 | A.
No. |\n| 14 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, do you mind if I clarify |\n| 15 | one thing with the witness? |\n| 16 | A.
Okay.
So I emphasized by the end of 2019 to the present |\n| 17 | time, Han Chunguang did not come to my 18th floor apartment |\n| 18 | more than five times. |\n| 19 | I see.
Q.
So after your deposition, he stopped coming to your |\n| 20 | apartment so frequently; is that right? |\n| 21 | A.
No.
I'm just referring to the question that you asked |\n| 22 | before.
I'm just saying that I don't really talk to him every |\n| 23 | day. |\n| 24 | Q.
Who is William Je? |\n| 25 | The Fifth Amendment.
A. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you testified in this case that William Je was a |\n| 2 | friend of yours, right? |\n| 3 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can I confer for a moment? |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 5 | (Pause) |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
All right.
Do you need the question, |\n| 7 | Mr. Guo? |\n| 8 | A.
Well, William Je probably is a director of ACA. |\n| 9 | Q.
Okay.
And my question is whether he's a friend of yours |\n| 10 | also? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
And you've known him for a long time, haven't you? |\n| 13 | A.
Well, I don't know what you mean by \"long time.\" |\n| 14 | Q.
Ten years? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
Fifteen years? |\n| 17 | A.
I don't recall quite clearly now. |\n| 18 | Q.
And you trust him, yes? |\n| 19 | Yes.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
And you believe he's anti-CCP, correct? |\n| 21 | A.
Of course. |\n| 22 | Q.
He's told you that, right? |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
And he sends money to places when you ask him to do so, |\n| 25 | doesn't he? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
The Fifth Amendment.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| | |\n| 2 | Q.
Do you recall earlier we looked at an affidavit that you |\n| 3 | filed in your Hongkuan Li lawsuit; do you remember that? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
Was the person from ACA who told you about the defamatory |\n| 6 | posts William Je? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
And was William Je the person that you were working to |\n| 9 | introduce to executives in Hong Kong and on the mainland? |\n| 10 | A.
I don't quite understand. |\n| 11 | Q.
Well, do you recall that you declared to the Court in |\n| 12 | Maryland that the purpose of your deal with ACA was for you to |\n| 13 | introduce them to executives and business opportunities in Hong |\n| 14 | Kong and on the mainland? |\n| 15 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 16 | Q.
Now, you know that William Je already has many contacts on |\n| 17 | the mainland, doesn't he? |\n| 18 | A.
Yes. |\n| 19 | And he developed those over many years writing the Greater
Q. |\n| 20 | China Desk for Macquarie, correct? |\n| 21 | A.
Perhaps. |\n| 22 | Q.
And do you know that he was -- |\n| 23 | THE INTERPRETER:
Stop.
It should be \"should be.\" |\n| 24 | Q.
And you know that he was economic advisor to several |\n| 25 | municipalities on the mainland, correct? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
I don't know. |\n| | |\n| 2 | Q.
Has he ever mentioned that to you? |\n| 3 | A.
I don't recall. |\n| 4 | Q.
How much do you -- let me ask you this. |\n| 5 | Do you know about any connection that William Je has |\n| 6 | to the City of Chongqing? |\n| 7 | A.
Now, perhaps that he mentioned something like that, but |\n| 8 | then, you know, in Hong Kong a lot of people talking about |\n| 9 | that, about being Chinese Communist Party member.
But, you |\n| 10 | know -- not communist party member, but then lots of people |\n| 11 | saying they are relative -- |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry, I'm rambling. |\n| 13 | A.
So I -- perhaps he said that, but I don't recall and I |\n| 14 | won't take responsibility of that and -- |\n| 15 | (Pause) |\n| 16 | But then he might have said that he is a member of |\n| 17 | CPPCC, but lots of people in Hong Kong claim that.
And so he |\n| 18 | might have said that, but I don't take responsibility for that. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, are you near a breaking point? |\n| 20 | MR. GREIM:
I actually am, yes. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Why don't you bring it to a close, and |\n| 22 | then we'll take our mid-morning break. |\n| 23 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 24 | Q.
So, Mr. Guo, have you done any background research into |\n| 25 | William Je? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
No. |\n| 2 | Q.
But you're the one who ordered ACA to pay the million |\n| 3 | dollars to Strategic Vision, correct? |\n| 4 | The Fifth Amendment.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And you introduced William Je to close associates as your |\n| 6 | money man, haven't you? |\n| 7 | A.
The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 8 | Q.
Aren't you concerned with Mr. William Je being your money |\n| 9 | man if he is associated with the CPPCC? |\n| 10 | A.
The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 11 | Q.
Mr. Guo, are you -- |\n| 12 | MR. GREIM:
Yes, we'll stop there.
Thank you, your |\n| 13 | Honor. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
It's now 11:44.
We'll break until |\n| 15 | noon.
One thing counsel should focus on during the break is a |\n| 16 | question raised by Mr. Greim with respect to the imputation of |\n| 17 | the assertion of the Fifth and whether there's a good-faith |\n| 18 | basis to challenge the assertion of the Fifth. |\n| 19 | My understanding of the law, and I'm directing myself |\n| 20 | to Ms. Cline on this as well, is that if there is a challenge |\n| 21 | to the assertion of the Fifth, it really should proceed |\n| 22 | question by question.
And it's for me, in the first instance, |\n| 23 | to determine whether there's sufficient basis to question |\n| 24 | good-faith assertion of the Fifth. |\n| 25 | And so, Mr. Greim, you should be thinking about, if |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | you do intend to challenge it, which particular question. |\n| 2 | All right.
We're adjourned. |\n| 3 | (Recess) |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
You may be seated.
Before we get |\n| 5 | started -- I want this to be translated. |\n| 6 | This morning I gave an order that retransmission and |\n| 7 | rebroadcasting of this proceeding is a violation of a Court |\n| 8 | order. |\n| 9 | Would the interpreter please interpret that so that |\n| 10 | the people who are listening on the phone can hear it. |\n| 11 | That order applies to people who are in the courtroom |\n| 12 | and people who are listening over the telephone. |\n| 13 | My order has been violated.
I know that for a fact |\n| 14 | because I have heard a transmission through YouTube of a |\n| 15 | portion of the proceedings this morning. |\n| 16 | In a moment, I will ask counsel if they know anything |\n| 17 | about this.
For now, I am ordering the US Marshals to |\n| 18 | investigate.
If this took place and we find out who did it, it |\n| 19 | may constitute and will constitute civil contempt and may |\n| 20 | constitute criminal contempt. |\n| 21 | Anybody who retransmits or rebroadcasts the proceeding |\n| 22 | going forward will subject themselves to civil or criminal |\n| 23 | contempt. |\n| 24 | Just so the record is clear, I have had a Chinese |\n| 25 | interpreter speak loudly so that those over the phone will hear |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | what I have said both in English and in Chinese. |\n| 2 | Ms. Cline, do you know anything about this? |\n| 3 | MS. CLINE:
I do not, your Honor. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, do you know anything about |\n| 5 | this? |\n| 6 | MR. GREIM:
I do not, your Honor. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
All right.
Mr. Klein, I've been informed |\n| 8 | that you wish to address the Court. |\n| 9 | MR. KLEIN:
I do, your Honor.
May I? |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 11 | MR. KLEIN:
There were some questions that were asked |\n| 12 | of my client concerning meetings with Ms. Cline, Eastern's |\n| 13 | counsel.
He has not met with Ms. Cline since the trial began, |\n| 14 | but I think there was some confusion in how the dialogue |\n| 15 | transpired, or at least the way his statements came out on the |\n| 16 | record. |\n| 17 | They should reflect that there were no meetings since |\n| 18 | the trial began, but my understanding is that there were |\n| 19 | meetings previously.
I've explained to my client that while |\n| 20 | his discussions with counsel are privileged, that the facts of |\n| 21 | his meeting with counsel or the fact that he had a discussion |\n| 22 | with counsel is not privileged. |\n| 23 | And if the Court or counsel wishes to inquire as to |\n| 24 | the fact of meetings that occurred with Ms. Cline prior to the |\n| 25 | trial, I wanted to -- certainly to the extent that the Court |\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\ndirects that they can do so, that's fine with us, he'll answer those questions.\n\nAnd I just wanted to make sure that I clarified that for the Court, and I thank the Court for indulging me.\n\nTHE COURT: Is there anything that plaintiff's counsel wishes to raise with the Court before we begin the examination again?\n\nMS. CLINE: I consulted counsel about the Court's request regarding imputation of the invocation and the adverse inference exercise. My understanding is that there are four factors, and we are willing to stipulate to two of them if the Court --\n\nTHE COURT: I'll hear you, but you've already agreed that there's a common interest between you and Eastern Profit and the witness. But I'll hear you with respect to the other stipulations, and then we'll hear from defendant's counsel.\n\nMS. CLINE: Yes, so my understanding is that that's one of the four factors, and the second one to which we're willing to stipulate is the role of the non-party witness in the litigation. So we're willing to stipulate that Mr. Guo is a key witness in this litigation.\n\n22 23\n\nTHE COURT: All right. Mr. Greim?\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, I think we're very close to establishing the other two. I would probably have a few more questions to develop that. As we go along, I'd like to kind of 24 25\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nfold them into my examination so I can do several things at once. 1 2\n\nTHE COURT: Why don't you ask the questions, and then if it turns out that there are specific questions as to which you wish to challenge the good faith of the assertion of the privilege, we can address those at the conclusion of the examination.\n\nMR. GREIM: And, your Honor, one other point. Our understanding is that challenging the good faith basis is the first point, something we'd really need to do here because then we'd have to maybe go back and get an answer, I suppose, based on your ruling.\n\nBut then designating the statements for which we think there should be adverse inference taken may not have to happen right this moment.\n\nTHE COURT: That's correct, and I should have made it clear, if it wasn't clear before, that the question of whether I should draw an adverse inference and which questions I should draw an adverse inference with respect to and, frankly, whether the factors are satisfied, are all things that I would expect counsel to argue after we're done taking the evidence in this case.\n\nSo each side should establish whatever evidence they think they can establish and need to establish, and then we'll answer what it all means. 23 24 25\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. GREIM:
May I continue the examination, your |\n| 2 | Honor? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| 4 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 5 | Q.
Mr. Guo, how frequently did you meet with Ms. Cline before |\n| 6 | this trial? |\n| 7 | A.
Who is Ms. Cline? |\n| 8 | Q.
Joanna, Joanna Cline sitting here. |\n| 9 | A.
So I did not meet Ms. Cline in person even once, but we met |\n| 10 | over online twice or three times. |\n| 11 | Q.
And did you play a role in the decision on whether to hire |\n| 12 | Ms. Cline as replacement counsel in this litigation? |\n| 13 | A.
No. |\n| 14 | Q.
Do you know who did? |\n| 15 | A.
I don't know. |\n| 16 | Q.
Did you meet with Ms. Cline or Mr. Chuff before your second |\n| 17 | deposition in this case, in December of 2019? |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, did you say before |\n| 19 | December 2019? |\n| 20 | MR. GREIM:
Yes. |\n| 21 | A.
No. |\n| 22 | Q.
You didn't meet with Ms. Cline during breaks at that |\n| 23 | deposition or Mr. Chuff? |\n| 24 | A.
You told me about the second time in 2019, right? |\n| 25 | Yes.
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
No. |\n| 2 | Q.
You conferred with Mr. Podhaskie about information that he |\n| 3 | passes on for Ms. Cline? |\n| 4 | I don't know whether it is a privileged information because
A. |\n| 5 | it is between lawyer and client.
Well, and also because I came |\n| 6 | from China; so I don't know when or what to use these kind of a |\n| 7 | law.
What is protected, I'm not sure. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
I think you can answer that question. |\n| 9 | You're not being asked for the contents of the conversation. |\n| 10 | You're just being asked for the subject. |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, do you mind to repeat your |\n| 12 | question?
I forget. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Let me ask the court reporter to repeat |\n| 14 | the question, please. |\n| 15 | (Record read) |\n| 16 | A.
Do you mean Joanna? |\n| 17 | Q.
Yes. |\n| 18 | A.
Yes. |\n| 19 | Now, you were represented by counsel when you were a party
Q. |\n| 20 | in this case, correct, Mr. Guo? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes. |\n| 22 | Q.
And those attorneys continued to represent you in |\n| 23 | discovery, right? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | And those attorneys were Mark Harmon and Erin Teske from
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the Hodgson Russ law firm? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
And? |\n| 3 | MR. GREIM:
Erin Teske. |\n| 4 | Well, the thing is, I know that there were two lawyers, but
A. |\n| 5 | if you were talking about their names, I really cannot be sure |\n| 6 | about the names. |\n| 7 | Q.
Do you recall that your -- let me strike that. |\n| 8 | Do you recall during breaks in the deposition, having |\n| 9 | meetings with your lawyers and the lawyer for Eastern Profit? |\n| 10 | A.
Well, what lawyers for Eastern Profit?
I don't know what |\n| 11 | lawyers for Eastern Profit.
I only met with my lawyer. |\n| 12 | Q.
Do you recall a lawyer for Eastern Profit named Zachary |\n| 13 | Grendi, or Zack? |\n| 14 | A.
Well, you see, I only met with -- you're talking about |\n| 15 | Joanna, right?
The thing is, I only saw Joanna, but I didn't |\n| 16 | meet her.
I only talked with my lawyer. |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, Joanna Cline and her firm are the fourth set of |\n| 18 | lawyers for Eastern Profit in this case, correct? |\n| 19 | I don't know about this.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
The lawyer before Joanna Cline was Zack Grendi, wasn't he? |\n| 21 | A.
I don't recall clearly.
I really don't recall. |\n| 22 | Q.
By the way, Mr. Podhaskie from Golden Spring was at your |\n| 23 | first deposition, wasn't he? |\n| 24 | A.
It seems so, but I cannot be sure. |\n| 25 | And you certainly conferred with him during breaks, didn't
Q. |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | you? |\n| 2 | A.
When was the break? |\n| 3 | Q.
In your deposition. |\n| 4 | I suppose so, but then I cannot recall it's such a long
A. |\n| 5 | time ago. |\n| 6 | Q.
You claim that those meetings were privileged? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
Mr. Guo, have you invoked the privilege, the Fifth |\n| 9 | Amendment privilege, here to harm Eastern Profit's interests in |\n| 10 | this litigation? |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
To harm or to hide, sorry? |\n| 12 | MR. GREIM:
Harm, harm. |\n| 13 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, Mr. Guo was invoking on advice |\n| 14 | of counsel. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So I think he can answer the question.
I |\n| 16 | don't think that there's anything improper about that question. |\n| 17 | MR. KLEIN:
Okay. |\n| 18 | A.
Of course not. |\n| 19 | Because you want Eastern Profit to win this case, don't
Q. |\n| 20 | you? |\n| 21 | A.
Of course not, and I hope that Eastern Profit will win this |\n| 22 | case.
Whether to win the case or not is decided by the judge. |\n| 23 | I'm only here to be the witness. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, do you hope that Eastern Profit |\n| 25 | wins this case? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
Very much hope so. |\n| | |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
Mr. Guo, is Golden Spring New York paying for your |\n| 4 | attorney, Mr. Klein, with a K? |\n| 5 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 6 | Q.
Mr. Guo, who is paying for Eastern Profit's attorneys in |\n| 7 | this case? |\n| 8 | A.
The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 9 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you spoke with Mr. Je about repayment of a |\n| 10 | supposed loan from ACA to Eastern Profit; is that right? |\n| 11 | A.
Fifth Amendment. |\n| 12 | Q.
Mr. Je -- you claim Mr. Je told you that he wanted that |\n| 13 | loan repaid, right? |\n| 14 | A.
The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 15 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you want to do everything you can for Eastern |\n| 16 | Profit to win this case, don't you? |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
Do you mind if I repeat the |\n| 18 | interpreting? |\n| 19 | Well, I'm only doing what I'm supposed to do as a witness.
A. |\n| 20 | I don't think about other things. |\n| 21 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you have attempted to influence the outcome of |\n| 22 | this case, have you not? |\n| 23 | A.
No, I'm only here because I want to prove that I'm not a |\n| 24 | double agent. |\n| 25 | Mr. Guo, have you threatened other witnesses in this case?
Q. |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
Absolutely not. |\n| 2 | Q.
Mr. Guo, have you paid any individual to stand outside the |\n| 3 | courthouse and protest? |\n| 4 | Fifth Amendment.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
Have you paid any individual to come into this courtroom |\n| 6 | and sit during the trial? |\n| 7 | A.
The Fifth Amendment. |\n| 8 | Q.
Have you threatened any witness that you will sue them if |\n| 9 | they testify? |\n| 10 | A.
No, never.
You see, the reason that I'm sitting here is |\n| 11 | because that the -- because it is the result of a threat, the |\n| 12 | threat caused me by the CCP.
Why should I do other things to |\n| 13 | other people? |\n| 14 | Q.
You're not here under subpoena, are you, sir? |\n| 15 | A.
What do you mean by \"subpoena\"? |\n| 16 | Q.
Did you receive an order from a Court requiring you to |\n| 17 | appear? |\n| 18 | A.
Well, I suppose I must have received a notice from the |\n| 19 | Court, right? |\n| 20 | Q.
That's my question to the witness.
Do you know? |\n| 21 | A.
I think so. |\n| 22 | Q.
Well, you were called in this case by Eastern Profit, |\n| 23 | weren't you? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | You didn't ask Eastern Profit to produce a subpoena before
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | you appeared, did you? |\n| 2 | A.
Well, I would tell you that, in Chinese, right, and the |\n| 3 | subpoena, if it is translated to Chinese, it is called |\n| 4 | Chuanpiao, then I received some notice.
I do receive a notice |\n| 5 | to tell me to be here, but whether it was a subpoena or not, |\n| 6 | I'm not sure.
I don't know. |\n| 7 | Q.
When Eastern asked you to appear as a witness, did you |\n| 8 | agree to do so? |\n| 9 | A.
Yes. |\n| 10 | Q.
Mr. Guo, since coming to the U.S., you have claimed to have |\n| 11 | access \"at any time\" to high-level CCP communications, correct? |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | Q.
And if you receive such information, you would certainly |\n| 14 | provide it to the FBI or CIA, wouldn't you? |\n| 15 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can we confer? |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 17 | (Pause) |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Do you need the question back? |\n| 19 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
No, your Honor.
I have |\n| 20 | the answer. |\n| 21 | THE INTERPRETER:
No, your Honor, I have the answer. |\n| 22 | A.
We, myself, provided some to the FBI, DOJ or CIA, but |\n| 23 | probably not all. |\n| 24 | Q.
And my question is, when you received such information, you |\n| 25 | provide it to the FBI or CIA or DOJ, correct? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
And you provide all of the information you receive to the |\n| 3 | FBI, CIA or DOJ, don't you? |\n| 4 | No.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
I'm sorry, was that an answer \"no\" to my question, or was |\n| 6 | that an invocation of the privilege? |\n| 7 | A.
I did not provide all the information. |\n| 8 | Q.
As I was sitting here, I may have misheard, but I thought I |\n| 9 | saw Mr. Klein say no to Mr. -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
No, no, no.
We're not getting into |\n| 11 | communications between Mr. Klein and his client.
If you want |\n| 12 | the answer read back, you can have an answer read back, but |\n| 13 | you're not going into what communications they had. |\n| 14 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you had the opportunity to receive high-level CCP |\n| 15 | communications, as you said, at least through 2019, didn't you? |\n| 16 | A.
I can't say that I have all the information, some. |\n| 17 | Q.
But by the time of your deposition in August of 2019, you |\n| 18 | had never met with the FBI or CIA to share information, had |\n| 19 | you? |\n| 20 | THE INTERPRETER:
The witness ask that you repeat the |\n| 21 | time. |\n| 22 | Q.
August 2019. |\n| 23 | A.
I don't -- I cannot be certain which month that we have met |\n| 24 | or which month we have not met.
And also, that I was requested |\n| 25 | by the FBI and CIA that any time that we met, that we cannot |\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nactually say that we met. And they also told me that if I say that I met them, it was actually a bad thing to my family in China. 1 2 3\n\nIn the fact that I'm sitting here, I wish I don't need to answer this kind of question because it is very bad for my family, friends in China. It is because in China, if you are having any connection with the partnership with the FBI or CIA, it is actually a crime of betrayal, traitor; so it can be sentenced to death. 4 5 6 7 8 9\n\nQ. However, you freely testified to that yesterday, didn't you? 10 11\n\nA. Well, actually, even yesterday I felt about that. I wanted to say that yesterday. It's just that, you know, I just cannot be doing the right thing, perfect thing all the time; so that is why I want to mention it here today. 12 13 14 15\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, we're going to show you from JX4 your first deposition, page 152, line 13 to 25 and 153, line 3 to 7.\n\n18\n\n21\n\n16\n\n17\n\n(Video being played)\n\nMr. Guo, that was your testimony in your August 2019 deposition, correct? 19 20\n\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. And it was truthful, right? 22\n\nA. Well, it was at the request that the CIA and FBI told me that I should not have said that. Well, on the one hand, because the deposition, after we had finished the deposition, 23 24 25\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | all the proceeding have been uploaded to the internet.
It can |\n| | |\n| 2 | be viewed; so for the safety, I need to say that.
And also, I |\n| 3 | made a promise to the FBI and CIA; so I have to say that. |\n| 4 | Mr. Guo, did you -- were you less than truthful in your
Q. |\n| 5 | deposition because the deposition was uploaded to the internet? |\n| 6 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can I confer? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 8 | (Pause) |\n| 9 | Why don't I ask you to stay apart from one another a |\n| 10 | little more, counsel, staying away. |\n| 11 | MR. KLEIN:
Understood. |\n| 12 | (Pause) |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, while they're conferring, how |\n| 14 | much longer do you think you have? |\n| 15 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I'm sorry to say I think I've |\n| 16 | got another hour.
I've got to go through some other clips. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Since it's 12:58, we're going to reconvene |\n| 18 | at 1:55, and that way, Mr. Klein can confer with his client |\n| 19 | socially distanced.
And we'll see you a little before 2:00. |\n| 20 | Make sure you're all ready to go at 1:55. |\n| 21 | MR. KLEIN:
Thank you, your Honor. |\n| 22 | (Luncheon recess) |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| As an initial matter, I'd like to ask the interpreter |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| to interpret in Chinese, and in a way that can be heard over |\n| |\n| I'd like to remind every participant in this |\n| proceeding, both those in court in front of me and those |\n| listening over the telephone, of one important point:
It is |\n| illegal for anybody to rebroadcast, or retransmit, or record |\n| I have issued an order to that |\n| Anybody who violates it will be subject to penalties |\n| I have ordered the marshals to |\n| investigate those who were retransmitting and recording the |\n| |\n| Does plaintiff's counsel have anything for the Court |\n| |\n| |\n| Mr. Greim, anything for the Court? |\n| |\n| |\n| Mr. Guo, you're reminded that you are under oath. |\n| Yes, your Honor. |\n| Mr. Greim, you may inquire. |\n| |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | the privilege.
I was just letting the Court know. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
It's up to the witness whether to assert |\n| 3 | the privilege. |\n| 4 | THE WITNESS:
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
What's your answer to the question? |\n| 6 | THE WITNESS:
Okay.
I am asserting my privilege. |\n| 7 | MR. GREIM:
Thank you, your Honor. |\n| 8 | |\n| 9 | |\n| 10 | |\n| 11 | |\n| 12 | |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | GUO WENGUI, |\n| 2 | CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED |\n| 3 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 4 | Mr. Guo, have you had -- first of all, is your apartment at
Q. |\n| 5 | the Sherry-Netherland Hotel? |\n| 6 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 7 | Q.
Mr. Guo, do you live on Fifth Avenue? |\n| 8 | A.
I invoke the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 9 | Q.
Okay.
I'm not going to ask you what you own or anything |\n| 10 | about the ownership.
I'm just asking, do you live in an |\n| 11 | apartment at the Sherry-Netherland? |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | Q.
Have you had cameras and microphones installed in that |\n| 14 | apartment? |\n| 15 | A.
Well, it's installed in the entire hotel building.
It's |\n| 16 | their own facility. |\n| 17 | Q.
So you have the capability to record audio and visual in |\n| 18 | your apartment, don't you? |\n| 19 | No.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
You've never had the capability of recording audio and |\n| 21 | video in your apartment at the Sherry-Netherland? |\n| 22 | A.
I don't quite understand what you mean, \"capability.\"
What |\n| 23 | does it mean? |\n| 24 | Q.
Have you been able to make video and audio recordings? |\n| 25 | Well, it really depends on under what kind of circumstances
A. |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | and also what kind of equipment, so I really can't answer that |\n| 2 | question. |\n| 3 | Q.
T&M Security installed the microphones and cameras in your |\n| 4 | apartment, didn't they? |\n| 5 | A.
What company? |\n| 6 | Q.
T&M Security. |\n| 7 | A.
Where is this company?
Where is this company? |\n| 8 | Q.
The question -- Mr. Guo, I'm asking you a question.
My |\n| 9 | question is:
Is T&M Security the company that installed |\n| 10 | cameras and microphones in your apartment? |\n| 11 | A.
Well, I don't know about the name of the company; however, |\n| 12 | I do know that it was before the true owner of this |\n| 13 | apartment -- prior to the true owner of this apartment, they |\n| 14 | have already installed the microphone and the camera.
I myself |\n| 15 | did not. |\n| 16 | Q.
Have you had audio and video recordings made in your |\n| 17 | apartment? |\n| 18 | A.
You mean I myself? |\n| 19 | Have you caused them to be made, either by yourself or by
Q. |\n| 20 | someone else? |\n| 21 | A.
I did not myself, and I did not cause -- I did not ask |\n| 22 | other people to do that either. |\n| 23 | Q.
Did you fortuitously find that recordings, video and audio |\n| 24 | recordings, had been made of meetings in your apartment? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry, counsel, I -- |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. GREIM:
I'll just rephrase. |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
Did you find that video and audio recordings had been made |\n| 4 | of meetings in your apartment at sometime? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
And were these recordings of your meetings with Liu |\n| 7 | Yanping? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q.
And you actually shared the video and audio recordings with |\n| 10 | some journalists at the Wall Street Journal, didn't you? |\n| 11 | A.
I actually found it from online, and then I shared them |\n| 12 | with the journalists. |\n| 13 | Q.
So, the video and audio recordings you did not make in your |\n| 14 | own apartment appeared online; is that correct? |\n| 15 | A.
Well, it was at the beginning, actually.
At the very |\n| 16 | beginning, they appeared on some Twitter that's from the CCP or |\n| 17 | some of the videos in China. |\n| 18 | Q.
And so you then discussed those videos and showed them to |\n| 19 | journalists at the Wall Street Journal, right? |\n| 20 | A.
I showed them the portion, a small portion of it, that |\n| 21 | downloaded from online. |\n| 22 | MR. GREIM:
Let's pull up Exhibit 34. |\n| 23 | Q.
I'm showing what's been marked as Exhibit 34. |\n| 24 | MR. GREIM:
Could you enlarge it even further to show |\n| 25 | that picture? |\n| | |\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\n| 1 | I'm going to ask the interpreter to please read to the |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | witness the caption to the picture that I am about to read. |\n| 3 | \"Chinese Businessman Guo Wengui, at his apartment at |\n| 4 | the Sherry-Netherland Hotel in Manhattan, where he says he was |\n| 5 | visited by officials from Chinese Ministry of State Security.\" |\n| 6 | Then there is a photo credit from the Wall Street Journal. |\n| 7 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 8 | Q.
My question is:
Mr. Guo, do you recall meeting with the |\n| 9 | journalist? |\n| 10 | A.
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q.
And is this a picture of you at your meeting with the |\n| 12 | journalist? |\n| 13 | A.
Yes. |\n| 14 | MR. GREIM:
Let's go to the next picture. |\n| 15 | Please enlarge it a little bit.
That's about as good |\n| 16 | as it can get.
There we go. |\n| 17 | Once again, I'm going to read the caption, and I am |\n| 18 | going to ask the translator to interpret it. |\n| 19 | \"Mr. Guo shows a video he says he made of the visit to |\n| 20 | his home by Chinese state security officials.\"
That's the |\n| 21 | caption, and then the photo is credited to the Wall Street |\n| 22 | Journal. |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
So, you were saying that I show a video |\n| 24 | to whom? |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 2 | Q.
Mr. Guo, I was reading the caption, and I asked the |\n| 3 | interpreter just to read it back to you.
That's all that's |\n| 4 | happened so far. |\n| 5 | Mr. Guo, my question is:
Is this a picture of you |\n| 6 | showing a video to the journalists? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes, that is the video I downloaded from online. |\n| 8 | Q.
Well, Mr. Guo, the caption says that you said you made this |\n| 9 | video of the visit.
Do you deny that? |\n| 10 | A.
I'm not denying that now.
The video that I was showing |\n| 11 | here, I downloaded it from online, and that video was made in |\n| 12 | my apartment. |\n| 13 | Q.
Mr. Guo, where is the video now? |\n| 14 | A.
I don't know.
I actually have never seen the entire video. |\n| 15 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you received a subpoena, didn't you, for every |\n| 16 | audio or video recording you had of meetings with Chinese |\n| 17 | officials?
Do you recall that? |\n| 18 | A.
Yes. |\n| 19 | And you produced nothing in response to that subpoena,
Q. |\n| 20 | correct? |\n| 21 | A.
I believe that we have provided everything. |\n| 22 | Q.
I guess, I take it, you did not keep a copy of the video, |\n| 23 | did you? |\n| 24 | A.
No. |\n| 25 | This was a pretty important meeting that you wanted to
Q. |\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\npublicize, though, wasn't it? 1\n\nA. Well, I did not want to publicize it, and, in fact, I did not know that there was such a video. That day, we had a meeting several hours all day, and I did not know that -- why that it would appear on the internet, I did not know why it was actually the CCP would have it, and, even today, I did not see the entire video. That's all I know. 2 3 4 5 6 7\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, is this the meeting in which you say that Chinese officials tried to kidnap you and take you back to China? A. Well, you know, that day, we had the meeting for many hours. What you said is really just a little bit of what happened. They have mentioned many times during that meeting that they have a lot of resources in the United States, and they have a lot of business, a lot of organizations, and a lot of businesses that can have me kidnapped and have me killed, so that I need to work with them. And during that meeting, they had me sign a lot of blank paper and guarantee letter, and, also, that I need to make sure that my wife and daughter return to China at the end of August. So, many things happened during that meeting. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20\n\nQ. Well, Mr. Guo, do you deny now that they actually tried to take you out of the building? 21 22\n\nA. I don't quite understand what you mean. 23\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, isn't it true that, in this meeting, your wife made dumplings for the officials. 24 25\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
And then you walked the group out of the building, correct? |\n| 3 | A.
Yes. |\n| 4 | Now, you testified yesterday that a transcription of what
Q. |\n| 5 | we called -- well, first of all, a document that we've called |\n| 6 | video 8 was an accurate recording of part of the meeting, and |\n| 7 | then you walked through the transcript of video 8, which was |\n| 8 | Exhibit 114B, starting at page 1362, with Eastern Profit's |\n| 9 | counsel. |\n| 10 | Do you recall that? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
And just to refresh your memory, I'm going to bring up at |\n| 13 | least the first page.
This is a bit of a long transcription. |\n| 14 | Here we go. |\n| 15 | As you can see, it started right here.
It comes from |\n| 16 | a YouTube link that you had actually viewed at your deposition. |\n| 17 | Do you recall that? |\n| 18 | A.
Yes. |\n| 19 | At your deposition, you also viewed a second clip, which
Q. |\n| 20 | was video 9, and it was also transcribed.
It starts at page |\n| 21 | 1377. |\n| 22 | MR. GREIM:
Can you go there, Becka. |\n| 23 | Q.
Do you recall that? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | So, Mr. Guo, I'm going to ask you a few questions both
Q. |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | about video 8 and also about video 9, the transcription of |\n| 2 | which starts at SVUS 1377. |\n| 3 | And you will see, Mr. Guo, the very beginning remarks |\n| 4 | that were recorded in this clip, at least, come from Liu |\n| 5 | Yanping, and he begins the conversation by talking about the |\n| 6 | 19th National Congress. |\n| 7 | Do you see that? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q.
And then he says, \"Let's get this thing over with.
Why |\n| 10 | have many cases?
Besides, it's not a big issue.
I calculated |\n| 11 | your assets.
After you pay the debts, you'll still have some |\n| 12 | assets left.\" |\n| 13 | Did I read that right? |\n| 14 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, where is it?
I actually |\n| 15 | don't -- |\n| 16 | MR. GREIM:
Okay.
Let me back up and be a little more |\n| 17 | careful here. |\n| 18 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 19 | So, do you see, Mr. Guo, on the far left-hand column, there
Q. |\n| 20 | is a timestamp that tells you the section of the video that the |\n| 21 | transcriber and interpreter is quoting from?
Do you see that? |\n| 22 | A.
Yes. |\n| 23 | Q.
The next column has the speaker? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | The third column has just a transcription of what was said
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | in Chinese, correct? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
And then the fourth column has the English translation, |\n| | |\n| 4 | right? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
And yesterday, you spoke with Eastern Profit's attorney |\n| 7 | using this transcription, right? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | MR. GREIM:
So I would just ask the interpreter to |\n| 10 | just interpret what I say from English into Chinese. |\n| 11 | Q.
So, Mr. Liu Yanping, at the 30-second mark, says, \"The |\n| 12 | conditions of your capital and asset are still very good.
Your |\n| 13 | company is one of the private enterprises.
To write it this |\n| 14 | way, to be honest, it's rare in China they do that.\" |\n| 15 | Do you see that? |\n| 16 | A.
Yes, I see that. |\n| 17 | Q.
And then you responded, \"That's too little.
See, how is it |\n| 18 | possible my debt is only making up 20 percent of my assets.\" |\n| 19 | Correct? |\n| 20 | A.
I don't understand.
Are you asking me a question? |\n| 21 | Q.
Yes.
I'm asking you whether you said that. |\n| 22 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 23 | MR. GREIM:
Now, yesterday, this witness answered |\n| 24 | questions off of this exhibit.
I don't understand -- well, let |\n| 25 | me state that differently.
I think I do have to object to the |\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n25\n\ngood-faith basis here, because, otherwise, we can't do anything else with this exhibit. 1 2\n\nTHE COURT: Mr. Klein, what's the basis? He did answer questions about this precise transcript and this precise meeting.\n\nMR. KLEIN: I believe, your Honor, he indicated that he sees his initials there. He was asked whether he saw his name on the first page; I think he said he did. I think the original question that was asked, I think, do you see this. I don't have any problem with him answering that he sees that, that he sees his initials there. The document is what it is, it speaks for itself, and he can certainly confirm what he sees on the document.\n\nI think if he's being asked today to affirm whether he did or didn't say something that is in the document, I think he has a right to invoke if he doesn't want to make that affirmation in court, but I understand that, certainly, if he's asked about whether certain things appear on the document next to his name, he can certainly answer that. 14 15 16 17 18 19\n\nTHE COURT: Do you have the testimony from yesterday? MS. DONNELLI: Yes. MR. GREIM: We do.\n\nTHE COURT: If somebody can tell me where it is, I'll pull it up. 23 24\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, it seems to be on page 630.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. My law clerk is helping me find it. MR. GREIM: He does seem to have answered whether those things were said to him. 1 2 3\n\nTHE COURT: Just give me a moment.\n\n(Pause)\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nTHE COURT: Mr. Klein, he was asked, at page 629 of this transcript, whether it reflects a conversation back and forth between Mr. Liu and then the witness, is that his understanding. He answered that question yes. So he didn't just subscribe to his name being on it, but he said it was the conversation.\n\nAnd then on page 630, after being read a portion of the transcript, he was asked the question did he, referring to Mr. Liu, say those things to you, and he answered yes. I don't see how this is anything other than a selective invocation and impermissible invocation of the Fifth, but why don't you explain it to me, how he can agree that a portion of the conversation -- actually, the whole -- that whole segment was a conversation he had, but then when Strategic's counsel asks the question, refuse to answer the question.\n\nMR. KLEIN: Your Honor, I think we've been -- I don't have the transcript in front of me, I don't see exactly what the portion is that he was asked about, but I believe that - can I just -- I'm not clear on -- when someone is asked about a transcript and says, you know, I see that my name appears\n\n168\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross there, I'm not denying my name is there, or that this was a conversation between us, and then answers a question to indicate that the transcript reflects that something was said -- maybe I'm splitting a hair too finely -- THE COURT: No, I understand the distinction. MR. KLEIN: Yes. THE COURT: And I will have somebody give you the transcript, but when the question is did he say those things to you, full stop, he's not being asked the question, do you see your name on the document; he's being asked an historical question, did he say those things to you. He was represented by counsel, by you, he invoked a whole bunch of times; he did not invoke to that question and the preceding question. MR. KLEIN: Right. THE COURT: So I'll ask the transcript be given to you, I'll let you confer with your client -- MR. KLEIN: Okay. THE COURT: -- but you're going to have a tough burden to explain to me why there's a good-faith invocation. MR. KLEIN: Understood, your Honor. THE COURT: Can somebody give Mr. Klein pages 629 to 630? (Pause) MR. KLEIN: I took a look at those pages, your Honor. I understand -- your Honor's correct, he was 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\nrecollecting a portion of the conversation. It's a portion of the conversation that related to a totally different topical area. It related to questions or a discussion about safety-related issues. I think the portion of the transcript that they're asking about now is a portion -- it's a different topical area, and it's a question about his assets. That's something that we have been invoking on across the board.\n\nI understand what the Court is saying, that this is the same conversation that he had with a particular individual, but it touched upon many topics, and we're invoking with respect to certain topical areas. And even with respect to those topical areas, I don't have a problem with him confirming that it's obviously on the page, but the invocation is -- I don't view it as selective because I view it as tethering consistently to certain topical areas that we've been invoking on.\n\nTHE COURT: Let me see the limits of your invocation.\n\nWill he invoke as to questions about whether he, in fact, said the things that the transcript reflects that he said?\n\nMR. KLEIN: I think with respect to certain select areas, the intention is for him to invoke across the board with regard to those select areas. And I'm leery of starting to try to slice the bread thinly, and maybe I'm mistaken, your Honor, but to the extent that he starts answering any questions about\n\n### L4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\nthose topical areas, we now veer towards a scenario where an argument can be made that we're creeping towards waiver, and I think it's cleaner to stay away from that.\n\nTo the extent that there are questions about topics that we're not invoking, I'm letting him answer freely. And we're not denying that the page says what it says, but I think we're in a little bit -- I understand what the Court is saying, which is that the text is obviously on the page, but from my perspective, it's on the page, it's there, no one is denying it's there, and the witness has certain constitutional rights that I'm seeking to protect.\n\n12\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nTHE COURT: All right.\n\nMr. Greim, here's what I'm going to do: You're going to have to ask the questions, the witness will invoke as to what the witness invokes, and if you ask me to at the end of his testimony, I will leave his testimony open to address whether there's a good-faith invocation of the Fifth. If there's not a good-faith invocation, we'll come back, and he will answer the questions that you've posed to him as to which he's invoked, and if there is, and I determine that there is a good-faith invocation, then that will be it.\n\nBut this is too delicate a matter for me to resolve right here. Mr. Klein is right, to the extent that he says that when you run the risk of trenching on constitutional rights, you have to proceed with care.\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 2 | Q.
Now, Mr. Guo, yesterday, you testified to a portion of |\n| 3 | this -- a small portion of this meeting in which your family |\n| 4 | was discussed, correct? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
But most of your conversation with Liu Yanping was about |\n| 7 | your assets, correct? |\n| 8 | A.
No.
So I need to -- no, I need to clarify one thing here. |\n| 9 | You know, from that conversation that we had, there was a term |\n| 10 | here, it says, \"write like this.\"
I want to point out to you |\n| 11 | where it is. |\n| 12 | So, there was a term here, it says, \"write like this.\" |\n| 13 | That is to say that he had me writing multiple guarantee |\n| 14 | letters according to his thought. |\n| 15 | And, also, I want to tell you that there is this |\n| 16 | transcript recording the audio that we've seen, but the thing |\n| 17 | is that there is a large portion of time during the interview |\n| 18 | that he took me out to the restroom, to the elevator, and had |\n| 19 | conversation over there, and those conversations were actually |\n| 20 | not being recorded. |\n| 21 | Q.
Mr. Guo, let's turn to page 1363.
If you look down at |\n| 22 | minute 3:30, you'll see Liu Yanping says, \"It comes after |\n| 23 | solving the matters.
After solving the problems, I can here to |\n| 24 | assure you that first resolve the problems.
Second, after the |\n| 25 | problem is solved, if you are still willing to make |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | contributions to our nation.\" |\n| 2 | Is that what he said to you? |\n| 3 | A.
Yes. |\n| 4 | And then you responded, \"Of course, I'm very willing to do
Q. |\n| 5 | it, if conditions allow me to do so,\" didn't you? |\n| 6 | A.
But I did not see this in the Chinese. |\n| 7 | Q.
You have to go to the next page. |\n| 8 | A.
Well, yes, I said that, but the thing is that it's also |\n| 9 | said if the conditions allowed.
The condition I mention here, |\n| 10 | I always insisted, was that CCP does not equal to China.
The |\n| 11 | China, the nation that I recognize, is a China that has one |\n| 12 | person, one vote, and that is a China -- my nation. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, I'm going to direct you to just |\n| 14 | answer the questions that are asked.
You'll have an |\n| 15 | opportunity, when Eastern's counsel asks you questions, to |\n| 16 | clarify or add anything that you want to. |\n| 17 | Go ahead, Mr. Greim. |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 19 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 20 | Q.
Now, Mr. Guo, by this time, your whole family was back in |\n| 21 | New York, weren't they? |\n| 22 | A.
When you're talking about the whole family, what does it |\n| 23 | mean?
Who does it include? |\n| 24 | Q.
Okay.
Let me be more specific.
Your wife, your son, and |\n| 25 | your daughter were all back in New York by this time, weren't |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | they? |\n| 2 | A.
No.
My son wasn't here. |\n| 3 | Q.
He wasn't in China, though, was he? |\n| 4 | That's correct.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
He was in London, wasn't he? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
Mr. Guo, please turn to page 1387. |\n| 8 | MR. GREIM:
Now, I'm going to read a long comment from |\n| 9 | Mr. Guo, so I am going to break it in half, and I'm going to |\n| 10 | ask Mr. Guo each time whether he said it. |\n| 11 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you said, did you not, \"He said, but Wengui, don't |\n| 12 | go to extremes.
He was trying to persuade me not to go against |\n| 13 | the Communist Party and Xi yesterday.
He asked me to admit |\n| 14 | publicly that I'm not against the party.
I said I have never |\n| 15 | said I'm against the party, neither have I said that I love the |\n| 16 | party, but I hope I will be given a reason in the future not to |\n| 17 | go against the party.
I hope one day I can close my Twitter |\n| 18 | account and go back to my normal life without speaking up in |\n| 19 | videos.
I will not make any decisions before the 19th National |\n| 20 | Congress.
I want to see if after the 19th National Congress, |\n| 21 | Meng Jianzhu and Wang Qishan have any positions.
If so, it's |\n| 22 | impossible that they will let me off.
I know this too well.\" |\n| 23 | That's what you said to Liu Yanping, isn't it, |\n| 24 | Mr. Guo? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
So, I read it. |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
That's what you said, isn't it, Mr. Guo? |\n| 4 | It was I repeating someone's phone call to me, and I was
A. |\n| 5 | actually repeating what he said over the phone to someone, so |\n| 6 | that is why I said here \"he said.\" |\n| 7 | Q.
Mr. Guo, this is a statement you made to Liu Yanping, isn't |\n| 8 | it? |\n| 9 | A.
I was repeating to someone what we said -- I said to Liu |\n| 10 | Yanping. |\n| 11 | Q.
And you say, Mr. Guo, in here that you told someone else, |\n| 12 | \"I have never said I'm against the party, neither have I said |\n| 13 | that I love the party,\" right? |\n| 14 | A.
But it's quite different from what you just said.
I said |\n| 15 | I -- they want me to publicly admit that I don't go against the |\n| 16 | Chinese Communist Party, so I said that I now did not say that |\n| 17 | I am anti the CCP, but I did not say that I love the CCP |\n| 18 | either.
That's what is said here. |\n| 19 | And, Mr. Guo, you also said that if Meng Jianzhu and Wang
Q. |\n| 20 | Qishan have any positions after that 19th National Congress, |\n| 21 | it's impossible they will let you off.
That's what you said, |\n| 22 | right? |\n| 23 | THE INTERPRETER:
The interpreter was corrected. |\n| 24 | A.
That's correct. |\n| 25 | And then you went on:
Q.
\"To be frank, I don't want to waste |\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\nyour time. If they're gone, and this generation comes into power, people like you can still survive. I will definitely announce that I'm not against the party, President Xi, the state, and the nation. I will add that I'm not against the Communist Party. Then I will close my Twitter account, and everything will turn around for the better, I'm sure. I will lead a normal life. I'm happy about this.\" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\nYou said that, didn't you?\n\nA. Well, you see, the thing is that I was on the phone with someone else, so that is why it's mentioned here, if you are here, and those people were no longer here, you, meaning the person who's over the phone talking with me, and he's actually someone of a high official in China. So if he was here, and those people were gone, that I will be willing to say I am not against the Chinese Communist Party. So I was repeating a conversation I had with someone else.\n\n(Continued on next page)\n\n SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\n168\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross\n\n| 1 | Q.
And, Mr. Guo, your concern was -- your ultimate concern was |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | whether Wang Qishan and his faction retained power after the |\n| 3 | 19th National Congress, correct? |\n| 4 | A.
Yes, because over the phone, I said that those were the |\n| 5 | people who were the dictators, and those were the people that |\n| 6 | who were -- so they should not be our leader and that also they |\n| 7 | were the corruption; so they should not be our leaders. |\n| 8 | Q.
Now, Mr. Guo, you then told the Liu Yanping that if he |\n| 9 | wanted to keep your son in custody, he could go ahead and do |\n| 10 | it, didn't you? |\n| 11 | I don't see it here.
A. |\n| 12 | Q.
I'm sorry.
Let's go to page 1388.
Do you see at the top? |\n| 13 | A.
So in here, I continue the conversation with the other |\n| 14 | person over the phone, and it was actually talking about that |\n| 15 | it was during May that my daughter and my wife came to |\n| 16 | New York.
Liu Yanping took them to New York, my wife and my |\n| 17 | daughter, in May, and he asked me to write this guaranteed |\n| 18 | letter that my wife and my daughter will return to China in |\n| 19 | August 27th, in fact, August 27th.
And so otherwise, they are |\n| 20 | going to have my son detained.
And so I said, well, if my wife |\n| 21 | and daughter, if they want to go back to China, let them go |\n| 22 | back to China.
If they want to detain my son, let them do |\n| 23 | that.
I would not compromise. |\n| 24 | Q.
Mr. Guo, let's go to page 1394.
I want to direct your |\n| 25 | attention to minute 31:30, and do you see, you say:
\"They now |\n\n168\n\n| | L4MPEAS4
Kwok - Cross |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | say that description was wrong.
If I have gotten into the |\n| 2 | blind alley, I would not still be alive today.
I want to be |\n| 3 | honest.
Today, I meet with you.
Let's not talk about grand |\n| 4 | theories but just something practical.
Let's get down to |\n| 5 | business.\"
Is that what you told Liu Yanping? |\n| 6 | A.
What -- I did say something like that, but again, it was in |\n| 7 | context with what I had said before.
It was -- I was repeating |\n| 8 | something that was said. |\n| 9 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you were bargaining with him over your assets, |\n| 10 | though, weren't you? |\n| 11 | A.
I am invoking the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 12 | Well, Mr. Guo -- okay.
Q.
Let's just forge ahead.
Let's go |\n| 13 | to page 1425.
As we're going there, let me just ask you a |\n| 14 | couple of questions to clear up for the record.
Liu Yanping is |\n| 15 | the Deputy Minister of State Security; is that correct? |\n| 16 | A.
He is the Deputy Minister and then also the Secretary of -- |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
The Ministry? |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | A.
And then he is also the Secretary of the Disciplinary |\n| 20 | Committee and also the Secretary of Law and Political |\n| 21 | Committee. |\n| 22 | Q.
Who was on the telephone with you at the same time as this |\n| 23 | conversation? |\n| 24 | A.
It was a general in the military in China who was arrested |\n| 25 | already. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
What was his name? |\n| 2 | A.
Are you asking his name? |\n| 3 | Q.
Yes. |\n| | |\n| 4 | MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, can I confer with him? |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 6 | (Pause) |\n| 7 | How much more, Mr. Grimes? |\n| 8 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I think I have another half |\n| 9 | hour.
I'm just going to withdraw the question to move on. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Mr. Klein, your conference is done.
He's |\n| 11 | withdrawing the question. |\n| 12 | MR. KLEIN:
I'm sorry? |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Your conference is done.
The question has |\n| 14 | been withdrawn. |\n| 15 | MR. KLEIN:
Okay. |\n| 16 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, on page 1425 now, I want to direct you to hour |\n| 18 | one, minute 18 in the middle of the page, and do you see that |\n| 19 | you -- or did you tell Liu Yanping:
\"The first I have evidence |\n| 20 | of Comrade Wang Qishan and his family holding huge amounts of |\n| 21 | illegal acquired HNA shares, overseas real estate and also |\n| 22 | evidence of his illicit relationships with women.
I will |\n| 23 | report it to the party central committee.\"
You said that, |\n| 24 | right? |\n| 25 | Yes.
A. |\n| | |\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross 168\n\n| 1 | Q.
And we'll skip down a few lines.
You say:
\"Secondly, |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | besides Comrade Wang Qishan, I also have information about a |\n| 3 | few people in the Politburo and the former standing committee |\n| 4 | who hold large amounts of assets and illegal funds in sands |\n| 5 | deposits overseas.\"
Did you say that to Liu Yanping? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
And you go on to say:
\"They also have illicit sexual |\n| 8 | relations with woman and illegitimate children.
I want to |\n| 9 | report to the central committee in the spirit of supporting |\n| 10 | President Xi's anticorruption campaign.
If President Xi |\n| 11 | promotes them to the standing committee, I know two of them who |\n| 12 | will enter the standing committee together.
Then President |\n| 13 | Xi's life might be in danger.\"
Did you tell that to Liu |\n| 14 | Yanping? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
Isn't this the same type of information you asked Strategic |\n| 17 | Vision to find a few months after this? |\n| 18 | A.
Related. |\n| 19 | Q.
And you wanted to use that information to oust Wang Qishan, |\n| 20 | correct? |\n| 21 | A.
No. |\n| 22 | Q.
You wanted to oust his clique from within the CCP, didn't |\n| 23 | you? |\n| 24 | A.
No. |\n| 25 | Let's pull up -- now we're going to switch gears, and let's
Q. |\n| | |\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n21\n\n### L4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross 168\n\ngo to videos one and four. We'll start video four. For the record, let's see, let's start with DX76A. Frankly, you should start with this.\n\nMR. GREIM: And, your Honor, this is DX76A, a declaration by Xiaoping Chen, Sam Chen, executed on January 17th, 2020. That's the declaration for this Court, to establish that two different YouTube links are true and correct recordings of interviews that Mingjing, or Mirror Media, took and kept in the course of its business as a TV station.\n\nAnd so it's the very first of those items, the very first YouTube link that he identifies on this August 31, 2017, interview that we're going to be moving to next. So I wanted to begin with this declaration and move the declaration itself into evidence.\n\nTHE COURT: I'll take it subject to a motion to strike, but what's the evidentiary basis for my receipt of this?\n\nMR. GREIM: Well, your Honor, this is the custodial affidavit to -- it's one of the ways to authenticate this video which we're about to show the witness. 18 19 20\n\nTHE COURT: Okay.\n\n(Defendant's Exhibit DX76A received in evidence) BY MR. GREIM: Q. Okay. Let's now go ahead and pull up video four. We're going to put a video up that is transcribed at DX114B. Don't 22 23 24 25\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | hit play just yet.
And the transcription begins at page 1320, |\n| | |\n| 2 | SBUS1320, of this video four, which is in Exhibit 114B.
I'm |\n| 3 | not going to -- obviously, this is a 31-minute video. |\n| 4 | Mr. Guo, you were shown this video at your deposition, |\n| 5 | were you not? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
And why don't we just play the first 30 seconds. |\n| 8 | (Video being played) |\n| 9 | Now, I had to find a good place to stop. |\n| 10 | Mr. Guo, do you recognize this as the first page of a |\n| 11 | letter that you wrote to Secretary Liu Yanping |\n| 12 | A.
I must clarify one thing with you.
Some such letters I |\n| 13 | have signed many times of the different versions of it, and |\n| 14 | also, for the video that just played, there were many versions |\n| 15 | of such video repeated online.
So I don't know whether this is |\n| 16 | the real version, but anyway, this letter, it was I who |\n| 17 | initiated it during the interview with Mirror Media. |\n| 18 | Q.
So you came to Mirror to discuss the letter; is that |\n| 19 | correct? |\n| 20 | A.
No, not discuss this letter.
It was that because they |\n| 21 | ask -- because my wife and my daughter, they want my wife and |\n| 22 | daughter returned to China in three months, and I don't want my |\n| 23 | wife and daughter returned.
So there was this letter, a |\n| 24 | guarantee letter to exchange that. |\n| 25 | And the premise of this letter that I show in Mirror |\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross 168\n\n| 1 | TV is also because before that time, there were many versions |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | of similar letters circulated around.
But if you were looking |\n| 3 | at this clearly, more carefully, the content of those letters |\n| 4 | were different.
Each page was different.
Some were saying |\n| 5 | this and some were saying that.
So I went to Mirror and showed |\n| 6 | them this is the letter. |\n| 7 | Q.
So, in other words, the letter that you brought to Mirror |\n| 8 | was the authentic letter, correct? |\n| 9 | A.
Well, the letter I brought to Mirror was the authentic one, |\n| 10 | but I don't know the one that you're showing now, this one was |\n| 11 | that one or not.
And I tell you that from March, April, all |\n| 12 | the way to 27th of August, all together I have been made to |\n| 13 | sign five different versions of such letter. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, please confine yourself to |\n| 15 | answering the questions being asked. |\n| 16 | THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes, sir, your Honor. |\n| 17 | MR. GREIM:
Why don't we try to save a little time |\n| 18 | here, and let's pull up -- rather than going through the video |\n| 19 | version of this -- actually, let's go to the five-and-a-half |\n| 20 | minute mark. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Is there a transcript of this, Mr. Greim? |\n| 22 | MR. GREIM:
There is.
This is the Exhibit 114B.
We |\n| 23 | started on page 13:20 and now I'm flipping to page 13:21. |\n| 24 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 25 | Q.
So, Mr. Guo, we're going to look at a transcript as you |\n| | |\n\n168\n\n SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. L4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross walk through a letter page by page. We'll try not to go through your entire discussion to save time, but I want to start at the very beginning of where you began to pick through the letter. So let's go to minute five-and-a-half. (Video being played) Okay. We're going to have to pause because I'm afraid we can't get it to go to a certain spot. This is the only way to do it. I'm afraid we're going to have to go back to second 30. And, Mr. Guo, the program actually does show each page of the letter so that everyone can view it. So we're just going to have to go back and play it. First of all, Mr. Guo, is this -- we paused it at, it looks like, at about actually the 30-second mark is really what that is. Do you recognize your signature in the bottom right-hand corner? A. Yes. Q. And is that the date, 8-26? A. Yes. Q. And let's go to the second page. Just fast forward until we get there. (Video being played) Okay. This is the second page? A. Yes. Q. And does this appear to be the second page of the real 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n(212) 805-0300\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | letter? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
And that's your signature at the bottom, or your signature |\n| 4 | at the bottom right-hand corner? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
Let's go to the third page. |\n| 7 | (Video being played) |\n| 8 | Mr. Guo, please review that and let us know if this |\n| 9 | appears to be the third page of the letter. |\n| 10 | A.
Well, you see the top of this page is quite similar to some |\n| 11 | of the versions circulated online, and so I don't quite |\n| | |\n| 12 | remember those several lines in the authentic letter right now. |\n| 13 | So I cannot be so certain about the authenticity of this page |\n| 14 | 3. |\n| 15 | Q.
Okay.
Let's go to page 4.
And do you recognize this page? |\n| 16 | A.
I believe this is. |\n| 17 | Q.
Okay.
Next page.
And do you recognize your signature on |\n| 18 | this, the final page? |\n| 19 | This signature, it should be mine.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
And, Mr. Guo, we didn't play it to save time, but while |\n| 21 | each page showed on the program, you spoke about it and |\n| 22 | discussed the contents, correct? |\n| 23 | A.
We took most of it. |\n| 24 | Q.
And in this letter you asked President Xi to assign you |\n| 25 | tasks, didn't you? |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
No, it wasn't what I wrote.
This is actually pre-written |\n| 2 | by Liu Yanping. |\n| | |\n| 3 | Q.
Is it your testimony you did not say that in this letter? |\n| 4 | Well, the whole reason I went on to that program was to
A. |\n| 5 | tell that this is not a letter that I wrote, and what's inside |\n| 6 | this letter was not my thought or my opinion. |\n| 7 | You see, the thing is that it was pre-written, and so |\n| 8 | I was asked to sign this letter under duress.
And as you can |\n| 9 | also see, that at the end of this letter saying that Guo Wengui |\n| 10 | submitted with reference -- with reverence. |\n| 11 | The thing is, first of all, I couldn't have typed |\n| 12 | those words.
I don't know how to type.
And also, that I had |\n| 13 | already been applying for asylum; so this is just at the |\n| 14 | juncture of the 19th of the Congress.
They asked me to sign |\n| 15 | this letter they had written to show Xi Jinping faith. |\n| 16 | Q.
I have no -- that was to be a \"yes\" or \"no\" question. |\n| 17 | MR. GREIM:
Check interpreter, you can go ahead and |\n| 18 | speak for the record so we can hear it. |\n| 19 | MR. YANG:
I believe what the witness had said was the |\n| 20 | asylum application was submitted on September the 9th -- I'm |\n| 21 | sorry, September the 6th. |\n| 22 | THE INTERPRETER:
The witness also says:
My asylum |\n| 23 | case was submitted on September the 6th. |\n| 24 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 25 | Mr. Guo, you told President Xi that you never crossed the
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| red line in this letter, didn't you? |\n| MR. KLEIN:
Your Honor, may I confer with my client? |\n| THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| (Pause) |\n| Mr. Guo, do you need the question back? |\n| THE WITNESS:
You mean the question just now? |\n| THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| THE WITNESS:
(In English)
Yes, your Honor. |\n| THE COURT:
Would the court reporter read back the |\n| question, please? |\n| (Record read) |\n| A.
No, because it was not written by me. |\n| Q.
All right.
Let me rephrase the question. |\n| On the third page of the letter that you signed, the |\n| letter says:
\"I didn't cross the red line,\" correct? |\n| A.
I didn't write them. |\n| THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, let me ask you a question.
Did |\n| you sign a letter to President Xi saying \"I didn't cross the |\n| red line\"? |\n| THE WITNESS:
Yes, I did sign such a letter. |\n| BY MR. GREIM: |\n| Q.
And, Mr. Guo, \"red line\" meant that you didn't put out |\n| videos and leak the national intelligence network, correct? |\n| A.
No, that wasn't what I meant, and also, it wasn't my |\n| meaning at all.
And none of these words were written by me. |\n| |\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross 168\n\nQ. But you explained, Mr. Guo, to the host exactly what that meant, didn't you? 1 2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nA. So you see the thing is that I was exactly explaining the opposite to the host. You see, I -- this is the letter prepared by Liu Yanping. I could not have possibly written a letter to Xi Jinping.\n\nI was explaining to the host of the program that I was forced to sign this letter, and then my -- what I thought is completely the opposite of what is purported in this letter. You see, I was forced to sign this letter because they want my wife and my daughter returned to China after three months, and also, at the time, I had already filed for asylum. In China, if I go back after I apply for the asylum, I would be sentenced to death.\n\nQ. Okay. So, Mr. Guo, is it your testimony that if we go through this entire video, we have to find the place in here where you tell Mr. Chen that you signed this letter under duress? You would have been very clear about that, right?\n\nTHE INTERPRETER: Counsel, I'm not sure I understand. You said where it's called and to find the place? I didn't get that.\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, we ought to be able to read through this entire video, and we ought to be able to see somewhere in here where you tell Mr. Chen that you signed this letter under duress, correct?\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| 1 | A.
But I don't recall. | | | |\n| 2 | Q.
And so you would never have praised President Xi and say | | | |\n| 3 | that you wanted to have the opportunity to serve President Xi | | | |\n| 4 | in this interview, would you? | | | |\n| 5 | A.
Well, not necessarily because I may say that just to seek | | | |\n| 6 | to protect my family, and also, at the time, I was seeking | | | |\n| 7 | political asylum.
I was aware of the great danger that I was | | | |\n| 8 | in. | | | |\n| 9 | Q.
Now, you didn't actually apply for political asylum until | | | |\n| 10 | September.
You testified to that a few minutes ago, didn't | | | |\n| 11 | you? | | | |\n| 12 | A.
It was several days after I read this letter.
I saw this | | | |\n| 13 | letter, then I applied for asylum. | | | |\n| 14 | Q.
And because you signed this under duress, and you were | | | |\n| 15 | under such severe duress, you certainly would have shown this | | | |\n| 16 | letter -- you would have included this letter in your asylum | | | |\n| 17 | application, correct? | | | |\n| 18 | A.
Not necessarily because I have a lot of documents.
So it | | | |\n| 19 | may not have been included. | | | |\n| 20 | Q.
This maybe wasn't important enough to tell the U.S. | | | |\n| 21 | government about? | | | |\n| 22 | A.
Well, the thing is that I have provided a lot of documents | | | |\n| 23 | to the immigration lawyer; so whatever documents should be | | | |\n| 24 | submitted to the government, it was decided by the lawyer. | | | |\n| 25 | Including Lianchao Han, right?
Q. | | | |\n| | | | | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| 1 | A.
I don't quite understand what you mean by including | | |\n| 2 | Lianchao Han. | | |\n| 3 | Q.
We'll just move on. | | |\n| 4 | Mr. Guo, when you -- you testified that you first | | |\n| 5 | stayed in the U.S. permanently in early 2017; is that right? | | |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. | | |\n| 7 | Q.
I'm going to play a video for you.
This video is | | |\n| 8 | transcribed at DX114B.
It's video one, and the transcription | | |\n| 9 | goes from page 13:14 to 13:15.
I want you to listen carefully, | | |\n| 10 | Mr. Guo.
Then I'll have a few questions for you about it. | | |\n| 11 | (Video being played) | | |\n| 12 | Now, for the record, there was a transcription playing | | |\n| 13 | on the video because it came from YouTube.
Transcription of | | |\n| 14 | the defendants, however, is done by the same -- by Jessica Chu, | | |\n| 15 | who's transcribed everything.
That is what that 114B, page | | |\n| 16 | 13:14 to 13:15. | | |\n| 17 | My first question to you, Mr. Guo, is:
Is that your | | |\n| 18 | voice? | | |\n| 19 | I really cannot confirm that that is my voice because on
A. | | |\n| 20 | the internet there were a lot of imitations and then copy of my | | |\n| 21 | voice. | | |\n| 22 | Q.
Well, there were some very strong statements in that video, | | |\n| 23 | don't you agree? | | |\n| 24 | A.
So I can tell you a hundred percent what has been said | | |\n| 25 | there was all fabricated.
They are all untrue, and even at the | | |\n| | | | |\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - Cross of 168\n\n| 1 | end, he said the times three, times ten.
If such is true, then | | | |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| 2 | why can't they say it out loud?
So it's all fabricated. | | | |\n| 3 | Q.
Mr. Guo, are you able to deny to us on the record, under | | | |\n| 4 | oath, that that is your voice in that recording? | | | |\n| 5 | A.
Well, first of all, whether that was my voice or not, | | | |\n| 6 | whether that was genuinely my voice or not is one problem. | | | |\n| 7 | Another thing is that it could be my true voice; however, they | | | |\n| 8 | could just have linked up different words of my voice and edit | | | |\n| 9 | it into this video. | | | |\n| 10 | Q.
Okay.
Let me ask a different -- | | | |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Mr. Guo, was that your voice on the video? | | | |\n| 12 | THE WITNESS:
Well, it's hard for me to identify | | | |\n| 13 | because there were so many of those things in circulation | | | |\n| 14 | online made like that.
I can't identify whether it was my | | | |\n| 15 | voice or not. | | | |\n| 16 | BY MR. GREIM: | | | |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you have many times attacked someone named Xi Nuo | | | |\n| 18 | online, correct? | | | |\n| 19 | A.
Well, I don't quite understood what you mean by attack. | | | |\n| 20 | Well, in fact, I was the one who had been attacked the most by | | | |\n| 21 | this Xi Nuo person.
But I don't know what you are saying when | | | |\n| 22 | you say attack.
What do you mean? | | | |\n| 23 | Q.
Do you have a nickname for this person, Xi Nuo? | | | |\n| 24 | A.
But it wasn't a nickname I gave him.
He was named Xi Nuo. | | | |\n| 25 | Q.
So that's what you call him? | | | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
Did you ever call him \"Shit Nuo\"? |\n| 3 | A.
I am just a follower of what other people online called |\n| 4 | him, but he called me something -- I'm not going into that |\n| 5 | here. |\n| 6 | Q.
Okay.
Is it fair to say you have a long-running dispute |\n| 7 | with this man? |\n| 8 | A.
He always -- he has been threatening me all along. |\n| 9 | Starting from 2015, four years, five years now.
He always been |\n| 10 | talking about it online, saying that having me killed, having |\n| 11 | me captured to China.
He's been saying that. |\n| 12 | Q.
Mr. Guo, you testified yesterday that you've done thousands |\n| 13 | of online videos, correct? |\n| 14 | A.
Yes. |\n| 15 | Q.
Isn't one of your main activities attacking other Chinese |\n| 16 | in the U.S.? |\n| 17 | A.
But I have never initiated any attack to any Chinese |\n| 18 | person.
Always it was that they who attacked me, then I |\n| 19 | retaliate. |\n| 20 | Q.
You have attacked many Chinese dissidents online, haven't |\n| 21 | you? |\n| 22 | A.
Well, the persons that I attacked, the persons they do |\n| 23 | attack me, and the persons I have retaliation against, the |\n| 24 | ratio in between these two numbers are very, very different. |\n| 25 | Mr. Guo, you also used Guo Media to attack Chinese in the
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| 1 | United States? | | |\n| 2 | A.
I have never attacked.
I was always on the side of | | |\n| 3 | retaliation. | | |\n| 4 | Do you own Guo Media?
Q. | | |\n| 5 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. | | |\n| 6 | Q.
Do you know who does own it? | | |\n| 7 | A.
I'm invoking the Fifth Amendment. | | |\n| 8 | Q.
Have you attacked Bob Fu online? | | |\n| 9 | A.
I have never taken -- I have never initiated any attacks on | | |\n| 10 | any person, only under attack under the natural protection do I | | |\n| 11 | retaliate.
And also, there were millions of people or up to | | |\n| 12 | million people online who were attacking me, and I wrote -- | | |\n| 13 | it's not possible that I would retaliate against every one of | | |\n| 14 | them either.
So it is really the strategy of the Chinese | | |\n| 15 | Communist Party, that unrestricted warfare; so it's containing | | |\n| 16 | all of the government's reports. | | |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, have you encouraged your followers to harass Bob | | |\n| 18 | Fu at his home? | | |\n| 19 | Impossible.
A. | | |\n| 20 | Q.
Have you encouraged your followers to harass Sasha Gong? | | |\n| 21 | A.
Absolutely impossible. | | |\n| 22 | Q.
Have you accused Sasha Gong of being a communist spy? | | |\n| 23 | A.
It was after she called me a spy, then I retaliate. | | |\n| 24 | Q.
What about Bob Fu, he's a pastor, isn't he? | | |\n| 25 | Absolutely not a pastor.
A.
He's a communist party member. | | |\n| | | | |\n\n| L4MPEAS4 | Kwok - Cross | |\n|----------|--------------|--|\n| | | |\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, isn't it a large portion of your activity since that recording we saw in April 2017, to attack dissidents in this country? 1 2 3\n\nA. It is purely lies. So it is a complete lie because, as you can see, that from April 19th that 99 percent of my activities was engaged in activities against the communist party, exposing them of the deeds that they have done in Hong Kong, Xin Jiang, and Tibet. I'm exposing the truth about the virus. I would not have time to engage in any of such activities on attacking the dissidents or overseas dissidents. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10\n\nQ. Mr. Guo, in that recording we just listened to a few moments ago, you said you wanted to go back to China after showing merit, right? 11 12 13\n\nA. I don't recall that.\n\n14\n\n25\n\nQ. And, Mr. Guo, you wanted to get research in evidence in order to take out the Wang Qishan faction of the CCP, correct? A. No. 15 16 17\n\nQ. And you wanted to do that so you could return to China and resume your former way of life; isn't that right? 18 19\n\nA. Absolutely impossible. If that is the case, CCP would not have threatened or arrest my family. So as long as CCP and Xi Jinping exist, it's impossible for me to return to China. Q. And you've never stopped working with the MSS, have you, 20 21 22\n\nsir? 23 24\n\nA. I don't really know what you're talking about. It's\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | absolutely rubbish. |\n| 2 | MR. GREIM:
I have no further questions. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
We'll take our afternoon break for |\n| 4 | ten minutes.
How long do you expect to have, Ms. Cline, on |\n| 5 | your redirect examination? |\n| 6 | MS. CLINE:
Probably about 15 minutes. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
And then we'll move to the last |\n| 8 | witness. |\n| 9 | Why don't you wipe off the podium. |\n| 10 | We're adjourned. |\n| 11 | (Recess) |\n| 12 | |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\nof 168\n\nL4MKEAS5\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n25\n\nTHE COURT: Before we get started with testimony again, I've got a warning that I want the Chinese interpreter to repeat in Chinese out loud. 1 2 3\n\nI have issued an order prohibiting any rebroadcast or recording of these proceedings. Anybody who violates that order is subjecting themselves to the risk of penalties for civil or criminal contempt.\n\nThank you.\n\nMr. Greim, you're standing up. You have something for the Court?\n\nMR. GREIM: Yes. I just wanted to briefly say, before I closed, I figured I better do it right this minute. I failed to move the entry of DX 114, video 9, translation and the translation for videos 1 and 4; DX 37, which is actually videos 1 and 4; and DX 35, which is a translation of the letter. I understand that Eastern Profit's counsel reserves all objections, including to authenticity.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. Those will be received subject to a motion to strike. 18 19\n\n(Defendant's Exhibits 35, 37, and 114 received in evidence) 20 21\n\nTHE COURT: Mr. Greim, are you leaving open any questions with respect to the invocation of the Fifth, or are we beyond that issue? 22 23 24\n\nMR. GREIM: Your Honor, we're not going to raise any\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | issues with the good-faith nature of the objections.
I think |\n| 2 | we probably will want to argue for an adverse inference on |\n| 3 | certain of those questions. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Very well. |\n| 5 | Ms. Cline, you may inquire. |\n| | |\n| 6 | REDIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 7 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 8 | Q.
Mr. Guo, Mr. Greim asked you some questions about |\n| 9 | statements you allegedly made in support of the CCP in 2017. |\n| 10 | Did you, in fact, speak out publicly against the CCP |\n| 11 | in 2017 and 2018? |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | Q.
Were there videos of your statements published on social |\n| 14 | media? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
I would like to show you a compilation of video clips in an |\n| 17 | exhibit that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 52.
Before I |\n| 18 | do so, I'd like to know whether you had an opportunity to |\n| 19 | review the video compilation in advance of your testimony |\n| 20 | today? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes, I did. |\n| 22 | Q.
Does the compilation contain accurate excerpts of the |\n| 23 | videos actually posted on social media in 2017 and 2018? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes. |\n| 25 | MS. CLINE:
Can we please play PX 52. |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | (Video playback) |\n| 2 | MS. CLINE:
Can we look now at PX 53, please. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Are you offering PX 52? |\n| 4 | MS. CLINE:
I was just going to tie it together with |\n| 5 | 53, if I may, your Honor? |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 8 | Q.
And, Mr. Guo, as to PX 53, are the YouTube links for this |\n| 9 | Exhibit 53 reflective of where the full-length videos shown in |\n| 10 | the clip were actually posted? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, plaintiffs offer PX 52 and 53. |\n| 13 | MR. GREIM:
No objection, your Honor. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Received. |\n| 15 | (Plaintiff's Exhibits 52 and 53 received in evidence) |\n| 16 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 17 | Q.
Mr. Guo, I have one more video to show, and it's shorter. |\n| 18 | This is a video of you.
It's a single video, but it's an |\n| 19 | excerpt from a video you made in July of 2018 in an exhibit |\n| 20 | we've called Exhibit 70A. |\n| 21 | Did you have an opportunity to review that in advance |\n| 22 | of your testimony today? |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
Other than being shortened, so that we could play it in |\n| 25 | court, is it an accurate reflection of a video that was posted |\n| | |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | on YouTube? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes.
My answer is yes. |\n| 3 | MS. CLINE:
Can we please play Exhibit 70A. |\n| 4 | (Video playback) |\n| 5 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, plaintiffs offer |\n| 6 | Exhibit P 70A. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
That's received subject to the motion to |\n| 8 | strike. |\n| 9 | (Plaintiff's Exhibit 70A received in evidence) |\n| 10 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 11 | Q.
Mr. Guo, what do you think of the implication that you're |\n| 12 | really a supporter of the Chinese Communist Party posing as a |\n| 13 | dissident? |\n| 14 | A.
Well, if I were truly the supporter of the Chinese |\n| 15 | Communist Party, then the registered spy in the United States, |\n| 16 | Elliott Broidy and Bruno Wu, they did not need to spend so much |\n| 17 | money and then to lobby a president or like Higginbotham from |\n| 18 | the DOJ to send me back into China. |\n| 19 | MS. CLINE:
No further questions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Anything further? |\n| 21 | MR. GREIM:
No, your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 23 | You are excused, Mr. Guo. |\n| 24 | THE WITNESS:
So I don't need to say anything more? |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
No. |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | L4MKEAS5 |\n| 1 | Thank you, Mr. Klein. |\n| 2 | MR. KLEIN:
Thank you, your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you, your Honor.
Thank you, |\n| 4 | everybody. |\n| 5 | (Witness excused) |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Next witness? |\n| 7 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I think the next witness is |\n| 8 | the only witness being called by -- I know the next witness is |\n| 9 | the only witness being called by Strategic Vision.
We've made |\n| 10 | special arrangements for her, and so they are bringing her in |\n| 11 | as we speak. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Very well. |\n| 13 | Mr. Greim, for planning purposes, how long is your |\n| 14 | direct of her? |\n| 15 | MR. GREIM:
I will tell you I've radically pared it |\n| 16 | back, and so I think it may be about 30 minutes.
That's my |\n| 17 | goal.
There should be few, if any, exhibits. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
We're going to finish her today. |\n| 19 | And, Mr. Greim, that will be the last witness; is that |\n| 20 | right? |\n| 21 | MR. GREIM:
That's right, your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
And, Ms. Cline, I take it, you don't have |\n| 23 | any further witnesses? |\n| 24 | MS. CLINE:
Correct. |\n| 25 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I discussed one thing with |\n| | |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Ms. Cline during a break.
I wonder if we could use this quiet |\n| 2 | time to cover that issue about the 8:00 o'clock? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 4 | MR. GREIM:
We wanted to know whether the Court would |\n| 5 | maybe extend tonight's 8:00 o'clock deadline to a time |\n| 6 | tomorrow? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
What time would you suggest |\n| 8 | tomorrow?
Did the two of you talk about it? |\n| 9 | MR. GREIM:
Actually, it may need to be a bit later |\n| 10 | tomorrow because we will be in the air on the way to Missouri. |\n| 11 | Maybe -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Do you want to make it 8:00 o'clock |\n| 13 | tomorrow?
Does that work for you? |\n| 14 | MR. GREIM:
That would be great. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Does that work for plaintiff? |\n| 16 | MS. CLINE:
Yes.
Thank you, your Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Has the witness entered the courtroom? |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Ma'am, you can step forward, please. |\n| 20 | THE WITNESS:
Sure. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
You'll have a seat in the jury box. |\n| 22 | That's what we're using as the witness box. |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
You'll keep your mask on; you'll sit |\n| 25 | there.
Keep your mask on. |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
Question:
Do I need to keep a double |\n| 2 | mask or just one? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Is it a KN95? |\n| 4 | THE WITNESS:
It's not. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I think you need to keep both masks on. |\n| 6 | THE WITNESS:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 7 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, I'm sorry, may I correct |\n| 8 | something I said?
I just wanted to remind the Court, we still |\n| 9 | have the outstanding issue of Ms. Wang's testimony. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Yes, that's correct.
I forgot about that. |\n| 11 | Mr. Greim, I think, for the record, you should |\n| 12 | formally indicate the name of the witness you're calling, and |\n| 13 | then call the witness, and then we'll swear her in. |\n| 14 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, the defendants call Sasha |\n| 15 | Gong, G-o-n-g. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon, Ms. Gong. |\n| 17 | Matt, would you please swear the witness. |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
Good afternoon. |\n| 19 | SASHA GONG, |\n| 20 | called as a witness by the Defendant, |\n| 21 | having been duly sworn, testified as follows: |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
Sasha Gong, Dr. Sasha Gong, last name |\n| 23 | G-o-n-g, first name S-a-s-h-a. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, you may inquire. |\n| 25 | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 2 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 3 | Q.
Ms. Gong, what is your profession? |\n| 4 | I'm a journalist, a scholar, and a writer, now a filmmaker.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
How long have you been a journalist? |\n| 6 | A.
Twenty-five years. |\n| 7 | Q.
And you said you were a scholar.
How long have you been a |\n| 8 | scholar? |\n| 9 | A.
For decades. |\n| 10 | Q.
Do you know Guo Wengui? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
How do you know him? |\n| 13 | A.
I interviewed him on April 17 -- April 17, 2017. |\n| 14 | Q.
And you also conducted an interview of him before the |\n| 15 | formal interview, correct? |\n| 16 | A.
The 17th was the formal interview, it's about a day and a |\n| 17 | half, and I formally interviewed him on TV on April 19, 2017. |\n| 18 | Q.
We'll come to that in a moment.
We'll get into the details |\n| 19 | later. |\n| 20 | Have you also been an intermediary introducing Guo to |\n| 21 | other people? |\n| 22 | A.
Yes, to other journalists. |\n| 23 | Q.
And did you eventually join the board of an entity promoted |\n| 24 | by Guo? |\n| 25 | Yes, I did.
A. |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
What was that entity? |\n| 2 | A.
Rule of Law Society. |\n| 3 | Q.
Did you become an acquaintance of Guo's after your Voice of |\n| 4 | America interview in the spring of 2017? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
Let's talk a little bit about your background, and we'll |\n| 7 | take just a few minutes here. |\n| 8 | Where were you born? |\n| 9 | A.
Beijing, China. |\n| 10 | Q.
When? |\n| 11 | A.
1956. |\n| 12 | Q.
Just as a youth growing up in China, what was your |\n| 13 | relationship with the government? |\n| 14 | A.
My family was persecuted.
In fact, I'm fourth generation |\n| 15 | of American.
I have two great grandfathers who came to this |\n| 16 | country as railway workers, and later they were sent back to |\n| 17 | the States.
And my grandfather also used to be American |\n| 18 | citizen and came back to China, stayed 20 years -- 20 years in |\n| 19 | jail as accused of being an American agent. |\n| 20 | Q.
Ms. Gong, were you yourself ever imprisoned? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes. |\n| 22 | Q.
When was that? |\n| 23 | A.
1977 to 1978. |\n| 24 | Q.
What for? |\n| 25 | For antigovernment speech.
A. |\n| | |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | of 168
L4MKEAS5
Gong - Direct |\n| 1 | Q.
Did you have any higher education in China? |\n| 2 | A.
In China, it's a little difficult to explain.
I have three |\n| 3 | years of education before -- from '62 to '65, my family got |\n| 4 | into political trouble.
We were sent to countryside.
I worked |\n| 5 | as a peasant, a farm laborer, and later I worked as a worker, a |\n| 6 | factory worker. |\n| 7 | Q.
Dr. Gong, I want to fast forward and focus.
Did you go to |\n| 8 | university in China? |\n| 9 | A.
Yes.
I went to -- I took an exam after I was released from |\n| 10 | jail.
The political situation change, and I took exam, and I |\n| 11 | got to picking university, the top university, in China.
I got |\n| 12 | two degrees there, a Master's and a B.A. |\n| 13 | Q.
Did you immigrate to the U.S. at some point? |\n| 14 | A.
Yes.
In 1987.
I came here first as a visiting scholar, |\n| 15 | and then I enter the Ph.D. program at Harvard University. |\n| 16 | Q.
Did you end up getting your Doctorate at Harvard? |\n| 17 | A.
Yes.
I got my Doctorate degree in 1995. |\n| 18 | In what?
Q. |\n| 19 | A.
Sociology. |\n| 20 | Q.
Did you ever become a U.S. citizen? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes.
2001, March 29.
And that day, I was lucky.
I was in |\n| 22 | a big dinner with President Bush with TV journalists.
I got |\n| 23 | the personal congratulations from President Bush, which is on |\n| 24 | C-SPAN. |\n| 25 | Q.
Dr. Gong, after graduating from Harvard, just if you could |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | very briefly walk us through your career? |\n| 2 | A.
Yeah.
I taught a few years at UCLA, and after that, I took |\n| 3 | a job.
I entered journalism, I took a job at Radio Free Asia. |\n| 4 | And after that, I actually work as -- work for AFL-CIO as a |\n| 5 | China expert, and quickly after a few years at AFL-CIO, I took |\n| 6 | some time off and campaigned for Hillary Clinton for her |\n| 7 | presidential campaign.
And after that, I joined Voice of |\n| 8 | America as its China director. |\n| 9 | Q.
What is Voice of America's mission? |\n| 10 | A.
Voice of America is a federal agency established in 1942 to |\n| 11 | promote truth, news, freedom, and democracy around the world. |\n| 12 | Now, do you still work there?
Q. |\n| 13 | A.
No.
I was terminated. |\n| 14 | Q.
And why was that? |\n| 15 | A.
Because I conducted the Guo interview live, and the |\n| 16 | interview was interrupted by Voice of America.
They thought I |\n| 17 | should not have that interview, and so they thought that was |\n| 18 | insubordination.
Also, that interview was approved by my |\n| 19 | supervisors. |\n| 20 | Q.
Dr. Gong, are you still in litigation with Voice of |\n| 21 | America? |\n| 22 | A.
Yes. |\n| 23 | Q.
So, aside from your -- well, so you're no longer there. |\n| 24 | What are you doing professionally today? |\n| 25 | A.
I'm making films.
I'm making -- I'm finishing one film, |\n\nL4MKEAS5 Gong - Direct of 168\n\n| 1 | which is five episodes, almost five hours' story, of dissident |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | movements around -- under communism.
So I interviewed people |\n| 3 | like Lech Walesa, Landsbergis was the first president of free |\n| 4 | Lithuania, and other founders of movements. |\n| 5 | Q.
Dr. Gong, are you involved in any policy organizations |\n| 6 | relating to China? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes.
I'm a founding member of the committee for present |\n| 8 | danger — China, which is a policy group in -- based mostly in |\n| 9 | Washington. |\n| 10 | Q.
I'm sorry, a partisan group? |\n| 11 | A.
No, a policy group. |\n| 12 | Q.
Oh, policy group? |\n| 13 | A.
Policy. |\n| 14 | Q.
What is the goal of that group? |\n| 15 | A.
To warn the United States of America the danger of China, |\n| 16 | of Communist China intervening with our -- well, economy, |\n| 17 | politics, and everywhere. |\n| 18 | Q.
Dr. Gong, have you stayed in contact with dissidents in the |\n| 19 | U.S. since immigrating and becoming a citizen? |\n| 20 | A.
Oh, yes, a lot.
And although I have to say I participate |\n| 21 | in fewer -- I rarely participate in dissident movement events |\n| 22 | because as a journalist, I kept a little distance, but I know |\n| 23 | most people.
They know me. |\n| 24 | Q.
Do you know Chen Guangcheng? |\n| 25 | A.
He's a very dear friend. |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Is he a dissident? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes.
And he was, what people called him, the blind lawyer. |\n| 3 | He spent years while helping people to fight the one-child |\n| 4 | policy and force abortion policy, and he was imprisoned more |\n| 5 | than once for a few years, and they tortured him.
And later, |\n| 6 | he escaped to the United States, and the Time Magazine put him |\n| 7 | on the cover page. |\n| 8 | Q.
How about Bob Fu, do you know him? |\n| 9 | A.
Bob Fu is also a good friend.
And Bob Fu escaped from |\n| 10 | China as a Christian, and he became a pastor in the United |\n| 11 | States, and he also got a Doctorate degree, and he started an |\n| 12 | organization called China Aid, which helps Christians to escape |\n| 13 | dictatorship. |\n| 14 | Q.
Dr. Gong, have you done anything to help dissidents when |\n| 15 | they first come to the U.S.? |\n| 16 | A.
Oh, a lot. |\n| 17 | Q.
What do you do? |\n| 18 | A.
Well, besides helping them to tell their stories in the |\n| 19 | press and help to -- well, driving, translating, helping them |\n| 20 | to get college application or whatever, all sort of things. |\n| 21 | Q.
Have you observed that many dissidents, once they get here, |\n| 22 | stay in contact with each other? |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
Over the decades, have you observed that there is any such |\n| 25 | thing as a dissident -- Chinese dissident community in the |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | United States? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
In your line of work, do you continue to closely follow |\n| 4 | events in China? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes, very much. |\n| 6 | Q.
And let me ask you about communication with China for a |\n| 7 | moment. |\n| 8 | Do you still have communication electronic |\n| 9 | communications over email or phone with anyone on Mainland |\n| 10 | China? |\n| 11 | A.
I'm trying to do as little as possible because -- as little |\n| 12 | as possible. |\n| 13 | Q.
Why is that? |\n| 14 | A.
Because the Chinese government monitor everything.
This is |\n| 15 | what happened:
When the -- |\n| 16 | Q.
Dr. Gong, I just want to -- we'll try to do more of a |\n| 17 | Q&A -- |\n| 18 | A.
Sure. |\n| 19 | -- as we move into some more details, okay?
Q. |\n| 20 | A.
Sure. |\n| 21 | Q.
By the way, what's the country code for China? |\n| 22 | A.
86. |\n| 23 | Q.
And let me ask you about the email address with qq.com. |\n| 24 | Are you familiar with that? |\n| 25 | Very much.
A. |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Is that a particular email provider? |\n| 2 | QQ is owned by Tencent the biggest telecommunication
A. |\n| 3 | company in China, which have already reach the monopoly status. |\n| 4 | And Tencent is the company, you know, totally controlled by the |\n| 5 | Chinese government, with a lot of Chinese internet police stage |\n| 6 | on there.
This is not my imagination, this is the press China |\n| 7 | proudly announce they have ordered internet police stage there. |\n| 8 | Q.
Dr. Gong, do you know anyone in China who would dare to use |\n| 9 | open phone lines and QQ email addresses to administrate web |\n| 10 | pages for true dissidents? |\n| 11 | A.
No, unless they want to commit suicide. |\n| 12 | Q.
Okay.
Let's just move on. |\n| 13 | Dr. Gong, in your line of work, do you have to make |\n| 14 | your own personal judgments about which Chinese living in the |\n| 15 | U.S. are reliable dissidents and which have some degree of |\n| 16 | loyalty to Beijing? |\n| 17 | Yes.
A. |\n| 18 | Q.
Okay.
Why? |\n| 19 | A.
Dissidents usually -- all the dissidents have a track |\n| 20 | record.
The track record's that what you have done in China, |\n| 21 | what make you a dissident in China.
You can't suddenly become |\n| 22 | a dissident without any track record, without incidents, stuff |\n| 23 | like that.
I can quickly make, you know, China -- I always |\n| 24 | joke, China is like a small country, everybody knows everybody |\n| 25 | else; if you graduate from certain school, like which school, |\n\nL4MKEAS5 Gong - Direct\n\nand you have schoolmates, and people can vouch for you, and you\n\nhave done something. Mostly, dissidents are helped in the States; they have done a lot within China. So I say, which county, which city, what you have done? We have a record, the press report, people report, court cases. It's not that difficult to trace. 2 3 4 5 6\n\nQ. Dr. Gong --\n\n1\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\nTHE COURT: Ms. Cline?\n\nMS. CLINE: Your Honor, objection. To the extent I think part of the answer was based on personal knowledge and part sounded like expert testimony on what a dissident is, we just object; Ms. Gong was not offered as an expert witness.\n\nTHE COURT: Yes, I will receive that subject to a motion to strike. 13 14\n\nI don't know how much more you have on the line that trenches into expert testimony. 15 16\n\nMR. GREIM: No, we're not offering her as an expert. We don't offer any expert. We're offering -- to the extent she has a lay opinion, it is intended to be based on her personal experience and not on any special method or expertise.\n\nTHE COURT: That, I think, will be the question if there's a motion to strike. 21 22\n\nBY MR. GREIM: 23\n\nQ. Dr. Gong, when did you first become aware of Guo Wengui? A. February 2017. 24 25\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
There were a series of interactions.
Did he come to |\n| 2 | request an interview with VOA? |\n| 3 | A.
Yes.
My senior correspondent came to me asking me for |\n| 4 | approval to interview Guo. |\n| 5 | Q.
And, ultimately, did you grant approval? |\n| 6 | A.
I told him I need to do some study, and it took me a couple |\n| 7 | of weeks to study and gave him my approval. |\n| 8 | Q.
And so did Mr. Guo have any requests for the interview? |\n| 9 | A.
Yes.
Mr. Guo came back and told the senior correspondent |\n| 10 | that he wanted me to interview him in person. |\n| 11 | Q.
And so what did you do to prepare for that interview? |\n| 12 | A.
I spent days to read the news reports and the various |\n| 13 | reports, and to listen to his previous interviews, and to ask |\n| 14 | around of that.
So I thought I understood the situation before |\n| 15 | I went to interview him. |\n| 16 | Q.
Did you then first interview Mr. Guo off the record? |\n| 17 | A.
Yes.
I gave him the precondition if he wants to be on my |\n| 18 | live interview, I have to preinterview him for a lengthy time. |\n| 19 | How long did that go?
Q. |\n| 20 | A.
Altogether, it's between 16 to 18 hours, I believe. |\n| 21 | Q.
Where did you do that? |\n| 22 | A.
In Guo's apartment. |\n| 23 | Q.
And where is that? |\n| 24 | A.
Sherry-Netherland Hotel. |\n| 25 | Did you meet Yvette Wang there?
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
How did Guo -- or did Guo introduce her? |\n| 3 | A.
Guo introduce her as his assistant. |\n| 4 | Did you meet Chunguang Han there?
Q. |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
How did Guo introduce him? |\n| 7 | A.
He introduce me as his cook. |\n| 8 | Q.
Did you see him cooking? |\n| 9 | A.
He cook us some noodles, yes. |\n| 10 | Q.
Did Guo use any nickname to refer to Chunguang Han? |\n| 11 | A.
Not a nickname; that's a Chinese way to addresses to young |\n| 12 | person, is that Little Han. |\n| 13 | Q.
Did the interview -- did the live interview ultimately |\n| 14 | occur? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
And did the Chinese government do anything that was |\n| 17 | significant to you leading into that interview? |\n| 18 | A.
Yes, several.
First, on April 17, two days before the |\n| 19 | interview, the Chinese Foreign Ministry summoned VOA Beijing |\n| 20 | correspondent and talk them blanket, if you do the interview -- |\n| 21 | we have two people there, and some of them, he said, you |\n| 22 | should -- you cannot do the interview, if you do this, it will |\n| 23 | severely harm the relationship between VOA and the Chinese |\n| 24 | government. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I'm sorry, they summoned you and somebody |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | else? |\n| 2 | THE WITNESS:
Not me.
Actually, my Beijing |\n| 3 | correspondent.
So that's the Chinese Foreign Ministry, two |\n| 4 | officials, came to our Beijing office. |\n| 5 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 6 | Q.
Dr. Gong, what impact did that have on you? |\n| 7 | A.
Oh, yeah, in that case, if a Communist government wants you |\n| 8 | not to do something, perhaps you should do it.
And the next |\n| 9 | day, on the 18th, April 18th, the Chinese embassy in Washington |\n| 10 | called my home office, VOA, for perhaps two or three dozens of |\n| 11 | times, every several minutes, demanding us to stop the |\n| 12 | interview.
And on that evening, April 18th, on the evening -- |\n| 13 | the Interpol Beijing office issued a red notice against |\n| 14 | Mr. Guo. |\n| 15 | Q.
And this certainly made it appear to you -- well, let me |\n| 16 | strike that. |\n| 17 | So, Dr. Gong, the interview happened.
Did it go to |\n| 18 | its full completion? |\n| 19 | No.
A.
It was supposed to be one hour formal interview and |\n| 20 | two hours of internet chat, which is very popular format, |\n| 21 | internet chat.
So it was supposed to have a chat happen in two |\n| 22 | hours.
But when the interview entered its second hour, on |\n| 23 | minute 15, and I got a call from Washington, I got a text |\n| 24 | message from Washington, ordering me to immediately stop it. |\n| 25 | Meanwhile, my producer in Washington, the remote producer in |\n| | |\n\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Washington, was ordered to pull the plug so we could not |\n| broadcast. |\n| Q.
Dr. Gong -- |\n| THE COURT:
Hold on for a second. |\n| Ms. Gong, when you're answering questions, please try |\n| to slow down a little bit just so the court reporter can get |\n| your words down.
It's very important for us. |\n| THE WITNESS:
No problem.
I apologize.
And I -- |\n| also, English is my third language, so I will try to be more -- |\n| THE COURT:
No need to apologize.
Just take your |\n| time. |\n| THE WITNESS:
Sure. |\n| MR. GREIM:
I'll try to be fast; you take your time. |\n| I'm afraid my own hurriedness is bleeding over a little bit. |\n| BY MR. GREIM: |\n| Q.
Dr. Gong, what did Guo do immediately after the interview |\n| was cut short? |\n| A.
Immediately when it's cut, Guo clapped his hands like this, |\n| great, great, great.
And he said, well, the interview may not |\n| be the news but the shortcut of the interview is the great |\n| news.
He was very happy with it. |\n| Q.
What did you see him do next? |\n| A.
And then he took off his phone and made a long phone call. |\n| Q.
Did he come back to you after the phone call? |\n| About an hour later, yes.
A. |\n| |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
What did he say? |\n| 2 | A.
He said someone -- someone inside the intelligence service |\n| 3 | in Beijing, his friend, told him the shortcut was caused by an |\n| 4 | agent in -- within the Voice of America who has a name and -- |\n| 5 | should I disclose that name? |\n| 6 | Q.
No, we're not asking for that Dr. Gong. |\n| 7 | A.
No.
So he came back to tell that's the name, that's the |\n| 8 | person.
I was sitting with my -- five of my reporters; we have |\n| 9 | six people there together.
Immediately, I did this:
I said, |\n| 10 | no, let's not talk about it because I know my duty; my duty was |\n| 11 | to report back to the federal government. |\n| 12 | Q.
Dr. Gong, remember, my question is just simply what Guo |\n| 13 | did.
So, I understand you have a lot, but just to move through |\n| 14 | quickly, though, try to just answer my question, if you could. |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
Did Guo, when he came back from the long phone call, did he |\n| 17 | appear happy, distraught?
What was his appearance? |\n| 18 | A.
He appeared quite happy. |\n| 19 | Did he indicate to you he had just spoken to his parents at
Q. |\n| 20 | all? |\n| 21 | A.
No, he said he spoke to someone who's high-ranking official |\n| 22 | in the intelligence -- in the Chinese intelligence. |\n| 23 | Q.
Did he say that he had just heard from his parents while |\n| 24 | someone was holding a gun to their heads? |\n| 25 | No, not at all.
A.
I had five other reporters with me. |\n\n|----|-------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q. | Did he appear shaken? |\n| 2 | A. | No. |\n| 3 | Q. | Let's talk about your interactions with Guo after the |\n| 4 | | interview. |\n| 5 | | Did you introduce him to anyone else? |\n| 6 | A. | Yes.
A bunch of reporters from time to time. |\n| 7 | Q. | Did you introduce him to Bill Gertz? |\n| 8 | A. | Yes, I did. |\n| 9 | Q. | How many times after the interview have you spoken with him |\n| 10 | | in person? |\n| 11 | A. | You mean face to face? |\n| 12 | Q. | Yes. |\n| 13 | A. | Well, more than ten, less than twenty. |\n| 14 | Q. | How often did you speak with him just either way, in person |\n| 15 | | or over the phone? |\n| 16 | A. | Well, I would say a few times a month. |\n| 17 | Q. | Do you feel you developed a friendship with him? |\n| 18 | A. | Yes, I did. |\n| 19 | Q. | In fact, did he give you anything, any materials from this |\n| 20 | case? | |\n| 21 | A. | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q. | What did he give you? |\n| 23 | A. | He gave me a very thick folder.
It's like -- like four |\n| 24 | | inches thick, materials, and give me several copies and asking |\n| 25 | | me to pass that to General Spalding and to Michael Pillsbury in |\n| | | |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | Hudson. |\n| 2 | Q.
Did he explain what it was he was giving you? |\n| 3 | A.
He said some case.
I had no idea at that time.
At the |\n| 4 | time, it's about somewhere in early or mid-2019. |\n| 5 | Q.
Dr. Gong, has Mr. Guo ever paid you for any of your work? |\n| 6 | A.
No. |\n| 7 | Q.
Have you asked him to pay you money for any of your work? |\n| 8 | A.
No. |\n| 9 | Q.
Do you have any running dispute with Mr. Guo about whether |\n| 10 | he would pay you for something? |\n| 11 | A.
No. |\n| 12 | Q.
Do you have any running dispute with Mr. Guo about whether |\n| 13 | he would help finance any of your projects? |\n| 14 | A.
No. |\n| 15 | (Continued on next page) |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| Q.
Did Mr. Guo ever introduce you to a man named William Je? |\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| A.
Yes. |\n| Q.
When was that? |\n| November 20, 2018.
A. |\n| Q.
What was the occasion? |\n| A.
In that morning, Mr. Guo and Mr. Bannon have the joint |\n| press conference.
In that press conference, they announced |\n| that they were up a Rule of Law Foundation.
So they announce |\n| that at lunchtime.
I got a phone call from that one.
He said |\n| Mr. Guo invite you and Lianchao Han and Bill Gertz, the three |\n| of us, to go to his apartment for lunch. |\n| Q.
Okay.
And so did you -- |\n| THE COURT:
Again, let me caution you.
Please slow |\n| down because we've got to make sure the court reporters get it |\n| down, and I understand that English is not your first language; |\n| so just take it slowly. |\n| THE WITNESS:
Okay.
In case they have problem, just |\n| interrupt me.
I'm fine.
My student does that all the time. |\n| Okay.
Q.
So who else -- I take it you then attended the lunch |\n| at Mr. Guo's apartment? |\n| A.
Yes. |\n| Q.
Who else was there? |\n| A.
Mr. Bannon and Mr. William Je. |\n| Q.
Was he formally introduced to you? |\n| |\n| |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | \"He's my money man.
Anything ask him about money.\" |\n| 2 | Q.
So did Mr. Je have any reaction to this? |\n| 3 | A.
He smiled. |\n| 4 | Did you then speak to Mr. Je?
Q. |\n| 5 | A.
Yes.
I spoke with Mr. Je.
Because I listened to him, in |\n| 6 | one sentence I recognized his Cantonese accent.
So I spoke to |\n| 7 | him in Cantonese.
I am Cantonese and that's my first language, |\n| 8 | my mother tongue.
So, you know, when you speak your mother |\n| 9 | tongue to someone, you disclose information usually.
That |\n| 10 | happens. |\n| 11 | Q.
What did Mr. Je tell you about himself? |\n| 12 | A.
Mr. Je told me that he been in the investment banking |\n| 13 | industry, and he also he works with a lot of Chinese government |\n| 14 | at provincial level. |\n| 15 | MS. CLINE:
Objection, move to strike as hearsay. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Let me ask the question.
Actually, is |\n| 17 | there any further testimony to support the admissibility of |\n| 18 | this testimony? |\n| 19 | MR. GREIM:
I would ask for how it affected a decision |\n| 20 | that she made later, but that will happen a little bit later. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I'm going to strike the testimony. |\n| 22 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 23 | Q.
Dr. Gong, did you ever speak with Mr. Guo -- and I'm not |\n| 24 | asking for any research or reporting that you did, writing, but |\n| 25 | did you ever speak to him about his work for the MSS? |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
And what did he tell you about that? |\n| 3 | A.
He told me when he was in China, he worked closely and for |\n| 4 | the MSS, which is the Chinese version of KGB.
And he said he |\n| 5 | paid up -- he's a rich man.
He paid their personnel.
He let |\n| 6 | them use their office space and that he paid for vehicles, the |\n| 7 | cars that they use, and also in his most prestigious hotel, The |\n| 8 | Beijing Tongzhou.
That's the name of the hotel. |\n| 9 | Q.
Did he say why he did that? |\n| 10 | A.
I haven't finished the other part. |\n| 11 | Q.
I see. |\n| 12 | A.
He said the space he gave them, the MSS, occupied a whole |\n| 13 | floor in his hotel, work with him all the time. |\n| 14 | Q.
Did he say why he did that? |\n| 15 | A.
Why? |\n| 16 | Q.
Yes.
Why would he make those resources available to the |\n| 17 | MSS? |\n| 18 | A.
Oh, yes.
He said the MSS, in turn, helping him to fight |\n| 19 | his -- help him to fight his business rivalry, and to the |\n| 20 | extent that they would write letters for him.
They would help |\n| 21 | him to, you know, fight back and to gain business.
So he work |\n| 22 | with him -- he work with MSS for business reasons.
He had a |\n| 23 | specific agency who he worked, which he worked with, which is |\n| 24 | No. 17 Bureau -- oh, no.
No. 17 Bureau of the MSS. |\n| 25 | What does that bureau do?
Q. |\n| | |\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\nL4MPEAS6 Gong - Direct of 168\n\nA. The bureau specifically, my understanding is that the bureau specifically works with large businesses. 1 2\n\nQ. Was there any particular person at the MSS that Guo said he was close to? 3 4\n\nA. Several, yes. Three names come to my mind specifically. First is last name Ma, M-a, first name, J-i-a-n. The last name M-a. And Mr. Ma was the executive minister of -- the secretary minister of the MSS, minister of public security. And Mr. Ma, from my understanding from Mr. Guo, was in charge of international espionage and investing -- no, investigating corruption. That's the first one.\n\nAnd second one Mr. Guo told me is person named, first name, Y-u-e, last name D-z-h-a-n-g. And he's a very high-ranking official in MSS. And he was Guo's business associate. What he did was he was in charge of hunting down the Chinese dissidents, and there are several people right here in New York City who were arrested or interrogated or tortured by Mr. Dzhang right here -- 12 13 14 15 16 17 18\n\nQ. That's not -- before we go off on a new area, can you tell us the third person? 19 20\n\nA. The third person's name is Hui Gao. Last name -- first name H-u-i, last name Gao, G-a-o. and that was a borough chief of the MSS investigative -- bureau of investigation, something like that. 21 22 23 24\n\nQ. I'm sorry. Go ahead. 25\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
And Mr. Guo told me he was very close to Mr. Gao, and |\n| 2 | Mr. Gao follows Mr. Guo around like his little brother.
And |\n| 3 | Mr. Gao was later -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
No, no.
You're just being asked about the |\n| 5 | conversation with Mr. Guo.
If you just try to limit your |\n| 6 | answers to exactly what is asked. |\n| 7 | THE WITNESS:
That was my conversation with -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
And try to keep your answers short and let |\n| 9 | counsel ask follow-up questions. |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | BY MR. GREIM: |\n| 12 | Q.
Dr. Gong, I know there's probably much more you could say, |\n| 13 | but I want to move on to another topic.
Okay? |\n| 14 | A.
Yes. |\n| 15 | Q.
Did Mr. Guo tell you whether he kept ties with anyone in |\n| 16 | MSS after he came to the U.S.? |\n| 17 | A.
Yes, he did. |\n| 18 | Q.
And who did he keep ties with? |\n| 19 | He said lots of high-ranking officials, but he did not give
A. |\n| 20 | me names. |\n| 21 | Q.
And did he tell you whether those high-ranking officials |\n| 22 | were giving him information so that he could whistle blow with |\n| 23 | it? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes, he did. |\n| 25 | Did you observe him actually whistle blow with any of the
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|---------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | | information he received from those officials? |\n| 2 | A. | I observed him whistleblowing, but whether or not from |\n| 3 | | those officials, I cannot testify. |\n| 4 | Q. | Did Guo ever criticize dissidents when he was speaking with |\n| 5 | you? | |\n| 6 | A. | At that time, not much.
Some, but not a lot.
Not like |\n| 7 | | today. |\n| 8 | Q. | Okay.
And you say \"at that time.\"
Is this, when, in 2017? |\n| 9 | A. | 2017. |\n| 10 | Q. | And so did his criticism of dissidents increase over time? |\n| 11 | A. | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q. | What did he typically claim about these dissidents when he |\n| 13 | | would criticize them to you? |\n| 14 | A. | They work for the Chinese Communist Party, CCP. |\n| 15 | Q. | Now, did you, yourself, believe that he could be correct? |\n| 16 | A. | I doubt it. |\n| 17 | Q. | Dr. Gong, did Mr. Guo eventually begin to criticize you? |\n| 18 | A. | Yes. |\n| 19 | Q. | When was that? |\n| 20 | A. | After I resigned from the board of the Rule of Law Society, |\n| 21 | | which is on August or September 2019. |\n| 22 | Q. | Now, you had just joined the Rule of Law Society a few |\n| 23 | | months before you resigned; is that right? |\n| 24 | A. | Yes, I did. |\n| 25 | Q. | And when you resigned, what did Mr. Guo begin to do? |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
He began to attack me on the Rule of Law Foundation and |\n| 2 | Rule of Law Society YouTube channels. |\n| 3 | Q.
What did he say about you? |\n| 4 | A.
He did not attack me as CCP in the beginning.
He attacked |\n| 5 | me that I slept with a lot of men, and he attacked me by |\n| 6 | calling me all sort of names, and later he attacked me for |\n| 7 | saying I took lots of money from the Chinese intelligence to |\n| 8 | separate him from Mr. Bannon.
Specific amount is \\$10 million. |\n| 9 | Q.
Did you, in fact, take \\$10 million from the Chinese to |\n| 10 | separate Mr. Guo from Mr. Bannon? |\n| 11 | A.
No. |\n| 12 | Q.
Dr. Gong, have you ever received physical threats from |\n| 13 | Mr. Guo? |\n| 14 | A.
Yes. |\n| 15 | Q.
What did he say? |\n| 16 | He publicized lists in his social media, in his
A. |\n| 17 | broadcasting, on his own social media platform.
He |\n| 18 | specifically list names, dozens of names.
I thought, I |\n| 19 | believe, I was No. 8.
He asked people to attack -- to wipe us |\n| 20 | out from the face of earth. |\n| 21 | Q.
Now, did you take him as just joking?
Is this just a slang |\n| 22 | term for a joke? |\n| 23 | A.
No.
I took it seriously. |\n| 24 | Q.
And are you aware of anyone on the list actually receiving |\n| 25 | harassment from other individuals? |\n\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Did he do the same thing with Bob Fu? |\n| 2 | A lot.
A.
He said Bob Fu was CCP spy and work for the Chinese |\n| 3 | government a lot, and he deserve to be wiped out.
So |\n| 4 | consequently, dozens of Guo's followers, who are paid, |\n| 5 | according to themself, to demonstrate for like six weeks in |\n| 6 | front of Bob Fu's house.
So Bob Fu has to move out of -- move |\n| 7 | out of the house. |\n| 8 | Dr. Gong, let's move along.
Q.
One final question.
Has he |\n| 9 | made any threats against you regarding your testimony this |\n| 10 | week? |\n\nA. Yes. On Monday, when the court case start, he broadcast for a whole hour, and on his on GGB platform. He personally made me -- not only call me names and call me CCP spy and all sorts of very, you know, dirty words, and said I was uneducated, I was low-life and something, something like that, and also basically nick-named me like a whore, something like that. And so on Monday, one of Guo's followers, who --\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\nTHE COURT: I mean, how do you know that the person was a Guo follower? I'm going to let you testify to what you observed Mr. Guo do over social media, if you actually saw him, but not beyond that. 18 19 20 21\n\nTHE WITNESS: The follower is because Guo took a picture with him yesterday that you are doing great, and that he's perhaps now right in front of the courthouse. BY MR. GREIM: 22 23 24 25\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | Q.
Dr. Gong, if Mr. Guo did not himself make the threat to |\n| 2 | you -- |\n| 3 | A.
Yes, he did. |\n| 4 | Then I only want -- then, please, only testify as to the
Q. |\n| 5 | threat Mr. Guo made and not this other person. |\n| 6 | A.
Okay.
Mr. Guo spent a whole hour on his social media |\n| 7 | platform attacking me Monday, on Monday, the day the court case |\n| 8 | began.
And since I've become a witness of this case, I have |\n| 9 | received so much harassment. |\n| 10 | Q.
Dr. Gong, have Mr. Guo's threats made you more or less |\n| 11 | likely to speak out about him? |\n| 12 | A.
A lot less. |\n| 13 | Q.
Why? |\n| 14 | A.
Any normal person would not want that much trouble. |\n| 15 | Q.
What effect have his threats had on the Chinese -- have had |\n| 16 | on the Chinese dissident community? |\n| 17 | MS. CLINE:
Objection. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Sustained. |\n| 19 | MR. GREIM:
No further questions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Any cross? |\n| 21 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, your Honor. |\n| 22 | CROSS-EXAMINATION |\n| 23 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 24 | Q.
Dr. Gong, you understand that this trial relates to a |\n| 25 | dispute between two companies, Eastern Profit and Strategic |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | |\n| 1 | Vision, right? | |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. | |\n| 3 | Q.
You don't know anything about Eastern Profit, do you? | |\n| 4 | No, nothing.
A. | |\n| 5 | Q.
You don't know a thing about Strategic Vision, do you? | |\n| 6 | A.
I know the owner. | |\n| 7 | Q.
Do you know anything about the contract between Eastern | |\n| 8 | Profit and Strategic Vision? | |\n| 9 | A.
No.
I have nothing to do with it. | |\n| 10 | Q.
You would agree that Chinese politics are complicated, | |\n| 11 | right? | |\n| 12 | A.
Yes, all politics are complicated. | |\n| 13 | Q.
And I think you said if the communist government wants you | |\n| 14 | to do something, you should do it, right? | |\n| 15 | A.
When did I say? | |\n| 16 | Q.
I thought you said it earlier this afternoon. | |\n| 17 | A.
I said the Chinese government want me to do something, I do | |\n| 18 | it?
No, I did not do it.
Please refer to the record.
That's | |\n| 19 | not what I said. | |\n| 20 | Q.
You did say you still have some communications with | |\n| 21 | mainland China, right? | |\n| 22 | A.
Yes.
My mom is 91 years old.
I have to call her from time | |\n| 23 | to time. | |\n| 24 | Q.
Does that mean you're a communist? | |\n| 25 | What do you mean?
A.
I call my mom from time to time.
That's | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | all.
I never said whoever call their mom and father and the |\n| 2 | relatives is a communist. |\n| 3 | Q.
You first met Mr. Guo in April of 2017, right? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And from that point until sometime in 2019, you were on |\n| 6 | good terms with him, right? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
In fact, you considered him your friend? |\n| 9 | A.
It's a yes or no question.
Yes, before November 18th -- |\n| 10 | November 20, 2018.
After November 20, 2018, I developed my |\n| 11 | doubts. |\n| 12 | Q.
And did there come a time, and I think it was 2019, the |\n| 13 | fall of 2019, that Mr. Guo made some statements about you in |\n| 14 | the media that you felt were untrue? |\n| 15 | A.
He made a lot of statements that were untrue. |\n| 16 | Q.
And he discredited a movie you were trying to make, right? |\n| 17 | A.
He did not.
He did not even know what movie I was making. |\n| 18 | Q.
As to the Voice of America interview you describe in your |\n| 19 | testimony, you wrote some articles on that subject, right? |\n| 20 | A.
Yes, I did. |\n| 21 | Q.
All right.
Let's bring up PX44, please. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Ms. Cline, what binder is this in? |\n| 23 | MS. CLINE:
You should have a separate bound binder, |\n| 24 | your Honor. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 2 | Q.
Can you scroll to the top, please.
Sorry.
We have to |\n| 3 | scroll for you but, Dr. Gong, you can see an exhibit we've |\n| 4 | marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 44.
Is this a copy of an article |\n| 5 | or an opinion piece that you wrote for the Wall Street Journal? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
And the date of this is May 23rd, 2017, right? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q.
Can you turn the page, please.
I direct your attention to |\n| 10 | the first full paragraph, I guess, the first sentence -- the |\n| 11 | second sentence.
There's a name there, Mr. Chen.
Is that the |\n| 12 | lawyer you referred to earlier in your testimony? |\n| 13 | A.
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q.
Okay.
And what you've written here says -- you refer to |\n| 15 | Mr. Chen, and you say:
\"The blind lawyer and human rights |\n| 16 | activist who escaped to the U.S. a few years ago estimates that |\n| 17 | the Chinese government spent 10.5 million spying on Mr. Guo |\n| 18 | alone.\"
Do you see that? |\n| 19 | Not Mr. Guo.
A.
On Mr. Chen alone.
On him, that's Mr. Chen. |\n| 20 | Q.
Okay.
Got it.
Next paragraph down it says -- the |\n| 21 | paragraph that starts: \"In the preinterview\"? |\n| 22 | A.
Yes. |\n| 23 | Q.
And the sentence says:
\"Mr. Guo explained that he paid for |\n| 24 | office rentals, private jets, surveillance systems, personnel, |\n| 25 | and many other expenses.\"
Did I read that correctly? |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | A.
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q.
And that was paying for expenses for whom? |\n| 3 | A.
For the MSS. |\n| 4 | Okay.
Q.
And you reported this in May of 2017, right? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
Can you turn to PX46, please.
And PX46 is another article |\n| 7 | that you've written, correct? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q.
And this one was published in the Washington Times in April |\n| 10 | of 2018? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
And let's turn to PX47, please.
And this is another |\n| 13 | article that you wrote, and this one was published, I believe, |\n| 14 | in something called the Daily Caller, and this was in May of |\n| 15 | 2018; is that right? |\n| 16 | A.
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q.
And can we turn to the third page of this article, please. |\n| 18 | I direct your attention to the paragraph that starts with |\n| 19 | \"Meanwhile;\" do you see that? |\n| 20 | A.
Mmm, hmm. |\n| 21 | Q.
You have to answer orally.
Do you see it? |\n| 22 | A.
Yes, I do. |\n| 23 | Q.
The second sentence says:
\"Ma Jian, the former Deputy of |\n| 24 | Minister of China's State Security, who was arrested for |\n| 25 | corruption, admitted that he took millions from Guo.\"
Do you |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | see that? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
At the time of the Voice of America interview, you mention |\n| 4 | that Guo had already made a name for himself exposing massive |\n| 5 | corruption among top Chinese communist leaders, right? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q.
You can take that down.
In late 2018, you became aware of |\n| 8 | the fact that Elliott Broidy was working with the Chinese |\n| 9 | government to extradite Mr. Guo from the United States, |\n| 10 | correct? |\n| 11 | A.
I was told by Guo, yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
Let's pull up Exhibit PX50, please. |\n| 13 | Exhibit PX50 is an article you wrote in December of |\n| 14 | 2018, or an opinion piece? |\n| 15 | A.
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q.
Is that right? |\n| 17 | A.
Yes. |\n| 18 | Q.
And in it you describe e-mails written by Elliott Broidy |\n| 19 | that you reviewed yourself, correct? |\n| 20 | A.
Yes. |\n| 21 | Q.
And you personally reviewed these e-mails, and then you |\n| 22 | reported a description of the fact that with the elections |\n| 23 | coming up, the Chinese government wanted to silence Mr. Guo's |\n| 24 | criticisms of Xi Jinping, correct? |\n| 25 | MR. GREIM:
Objection to the foundation, unless she's |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | just asking whether she said those words. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Overruled. |\n| 3 | A.
Please refer the paragraph to me. |\n| 4 | I'd be happy to.
Q.
Let's go to the second page. |\n| 5 | So at the bottom of page 2 of PX50, you're quoting an |\n| 6 | e-mail that you read that Mr. Broidy wrote, correct? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | MR. GREIM:
Objection, foundation. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Overruled. |\n| 10 | Q.
And I'll just read it, and then I'll ask you if I've read |\n| 11 | it correctly.
So there's an italicized, bolded quote that |\n| 12 | starts at the bottom of page 2:
\"The country involved has good |\n| 13 | relations with China and the United States and offered a |\n| 14 | lucrative opportunity.
China wants to extradite from the |\n| 15 | United States Guo Wengui, who is very critical of President Xi |\n| 16 | Jinping and now living as a fugitive in New York City.
Guo |\n| 17 | defrauded many investors, including Abu Dhabi for \\$3 billion. |\n| 18 | We elections coming up in China this fall, the Chinese want him |\n| 19 | to be kept quiet.
I believe a negotiation can take place, |\n| 20 | which includes Abu Dhabi receiving its \\$3 billion back and Abu |\n| 21 | Dhabi extraditing Guo from the United States to Abu Dhabi. |\n| 22 | Later, Abu Dhabi would allow extradition to China.
I was told |\n| 23 | that China would pay us, and if the facts are indeed correct, I |\n| 24 | assume Abu Dhabi would feel obligated to pay a fee as well.\" |\n| 25 | Did I read that correctly? |\n\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | of 168
L4MPEAS6
Gong - Cross |\n| 1 | A.
You read that correctly, but those are not my words. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
With respect to the prior objection, I'm |\n| 3 | not receiving the statement about what Broidy wrote for the |\n| 4 | truth, it's just to impeach the witness. |\n| 5 | Q.
That's a quote from you that you reported in December of |\n| 6 | 2018, based on your review of Mr. Broidy's e-mails, correct? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes.
That's a quote from me, but I did not wrote that |\n| 8 | sentence, as you said before. |\n| 9 | Q.
If you can turn the page to page 5 of PX50.
Keep scrolling |\n| 10 | down to the bottom, please.
And on page 5 you report the |\n| 11 | following:
\"In the following month, the Chinese government |\n| 12 | made some crucial moves to extradite Guo, who applied for |\n| 13 | political asylum as a resident of Hong Kong.\"
That's a |\n| 14 | sentence you wrote, correct? |\n| 15 | A.
That's a sentence I wrote. |\n| 16 | Q.
And your article also talks about officials from the |\n| 17 | Chinese government who came to visit Mr. Guo in the United |\n| 18 | States, right? |\n| 19 | A.
Yes, that's the minister level, the head, one of the top |\n| 20 | officials in MSS.
It's like No. 2 in KGB, something like that. |\n| 21 | Q.
And you're aware that Mr. Broidy was later indicted in |\n\nQ. And you're aware that Mr. Broidy was later indicted in connection with a scheme to extradite Mr. Guo, right? A. Yes.\n\nMR. GREIM: Objection, foundation. THE COURT: Sustained.\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | L4MPEAS6
Gong - Cross |\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
Okay.
So should I -- I'm sorry.
I |\n| 2 | missed that. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
So when I sustain as to an objection, that |\n| 4 | means that you don't have to answer the question. |\n| 5 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
When I say \"overruled,\" it means you |\n| 7 | should go ahead and answer. |\n| 8 | THE WITNESS:
I understand.
I just did not -- you |\n| 9 | know, I was paying attention -- sorry about that, your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Oh, that's okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 11 | MS. CLINE:
Apologies if I misstated, your Honor.
I |\n| 12 | was trying to lay a foundation. |\n| 13 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 14 | Q.
So the question is:
Are you aware, in the course of your |\n| 15 | work as a journalist who is steeped in Chinese politics, that |\n| 16 | Mr. Broidy was essentially indicted for his role in a scheme to |\n| 17 | deport Mr. Guo? |\n| 18 | A.
That, I was not aware.
I thought he was indicted for not |\n| 19 | register as a foreign agent. |\n| 20 | Q.
Did you ever read his indictment? |\n| 21 | A.
I don't remember.
I don't recall I did. |\n| 22 | Q.
Did you ever read his guilty plea? |\n| 23 | A.
For failing to register an agent, I read the news.
I did |\n| 24 | not read his plea. |\n| 25 | And so your testimony under oath is that you never read his
Q. |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | plea agreement? |\n| 2 | A.
No. |\n| 3 | Q.
Even though you're a reporter who's very interested in |\n| 4 | Chinese American politics? |\n| 5 | A.
That's Malaysian politics. |\n| 6 | Q.
In March of 2018, you wrote a letter in favor of -- let me |\n| 7 | interrupt myself. |\n| 8 | MS. CLINE:
Your Honor, before I forget, plaintiff |\n| 9 | offers Exhibit PX44, 46, 47 and 50. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Those are received subject to motions to |\n| 11 | strike.
I take it there's no objection as to the authenticity; |\n| 12 | is that right, counsel? |\n| 13 | MR. GREIM:
I'm sorry, your Honor.
I don't -- I don't |\n| 14 | have them in front of me. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
They're all articles. |\n| 16 | MR. GREIM:
We have no objection on the authenticity |\n| 17 | of any of those, correct. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Those are received subject to a motion to |\n| 19 | strike. |\n| 20 | (Plaintiff's Exhibits PX44, 46, 47 and 50 received in |\n| 21 | evidence) |\n| 22 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 23 | Q.
Dr. Gong, when we were looking at the articles, the three |\n| 24 | articles that you'd written about the Voice of America |\n| 25 | interview, did you in any of those -- let me take a step back |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | for a minute. |\n| 2 | You testified, when Mr. Greim was asking you |\n| 3 | questions, that upon the interruption of the interview, Mr. Guo |\n| 4 | clapped his hands.
Did I understand you correctly? |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q.
And are you suggesting that you believe Mr. Guo was happy |\n| 7 | that the interview got cut short? |\n| 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q.
In any of the three articles that you wrote on the Voice of |\n| 10 | America interview and its interruption, did you report on the |\n| 11 | fact that Guo seemed happy that it had got cut short? |\n| 12 | A.
I was not supposed to because when, at the interview end |\n| 13 | and the conversation becomes off the record, what happens |\n| 14 | that -- I will take -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Ma'am, you're just being asked a simple |\n| 16 | question.
The question pertains to the articles you wrote. |\n| 17 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Let me have the court reporter read back |\n| 19 | the question beginning with \"In any of the three articles.\" |\n| 20 | (Record read) |\n| 21 | THE WITNESS:
No, I'm not supposed to. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I'm going to strike everything after \"No.\" |\n| 23 | You can inquire on further examination. |\n| 24 | BY MS. CLINE: |\n| 25 | In March of 2018, you wrote a letter to the United States
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | government in support of Mr. Guo's asylum application, correct? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
Let's pull up Exhibit DX123, please.
So, Dr. Gong, we're |\n| 4 | showing you an exhibit that's been marked as DX123.
The first |\n| 5 | couple of pages are an e-mail trail, and then if we can scroll |\n| 6 | to the -- I guess it's the third page.
There's a letter, and |\n| 7 | then just before I ask you to identify it, can you scroll all |\n| 8 | the way to the end and just can I verify that that's your |\n| 9 | signature there? |\n| 10 | A.
That is my signature. |\n| 11 | Q.
Okay.
And is this the letter that you wrote in support of |\n| 12 | Mr. Guo's asylum application? |\n| 13 | A.
Look like so. |\n| 14 | Q.
And were the statements that you wrote in this letter to |\n| 15 | the United States government true when you wrote them? |\n| 16 | A.
It is true.
It's still true. |\n| 17 | Q.
Let's turn back to the first page of the letter.
So I |\n| 18 | direct your attention to the second paragraph of the letter, |\n| 19 | the second sentence.
It says:
\"Mr. Guo worked closely for |\n| 20 | years with Chinese intelligence services and claims he even |\n| 21 | financed their operations for investigating overseas corruption |\n| 22 | by Chinese government officials.\"
Do you see that? |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
And you supported his asylum application notwithstanding |\n| 25 | that fact, correct? |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | A.
That's correct. |\n| 2 | Q.
And in paragraph 2, you refer to Mr. Guo's social media |\n| 3 | campaign to expose corruption; do you see that? |\n| 4 | Yes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And in it you describe that Mr. Guo's postings have |\n| 6 | hundreds of thousands of views; is that right? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
And you say:
\"As a veteran journalist, I believe that |\n| 9 | Mr. Guo has successfully created a 'we media' phenomenon, |\n| 10 | proliferating do-it-yourself investigative journalism |\n| 11 | particularly regarding the Chinese government\"? |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | Q.
That was a true statement, right? |\n| 14 | A.
It's still true. |\n| 15 | Q.
Let me turn the page.
The third page here, in, I guess, |\n| 16 | the third sentence, you point out that as an experienced |\n| 17 | journalist, you personally verified some of his major stories |\n| 18 | with independent sources; is that accurate? |\n| 19 | Yes, very accurate.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
And the next paragraph you say that Mr. Guo has challenged |\n| 21 | the legitimacy of the communist leaders in China with so much |\n| 22 | convincing evidence from inside the government itself; is that |\n| 23 | true? |\n| 24 | A.
Yes, at the time. |\n| 25 | And let's go to paragraph 5.
Q.
And in paragraph 5 you |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | describe an incident in which Mr. Guo was supposed to speak at |\n| 2 | the Hudson interview and the interview was cut off; is that |\n| 3 | correct? |\n| 4 | That's correct.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
And your understanding was that the interview was cut off |\n| 6 | at the behest of the Chinese government, correct? |\n| 7 | A.
I learned from Mr. Lianchao Han, yes. |\n| 8 | Q.
And then let's go down to the next paragraph.
You make |\n| 9 | reference to the fact that Mr. Guo's social media accounts were |\n| 10 | suspended, right? |\n| 11 | A.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q.
And then you also make reference to the fact that the |\n| 13 | PRC -- and that's People's Republic of China, right? |\n| 14 | A.
Right. |\n| 15 | Q.
And they had hired a bot army with fake accounts to make |\n| 16 | complaints about Guo on YouTube; is that right? |\n| 17 | A.
That's what I believed at the time. |\n| 18 | Q.
And did you ever come to know that, in fact, Twitter took |\n| 19 | down thousands of accounts attributed to the PRC that were |\n| 20 | targeting Mr. Guo? |\n| 21 | A.
Repeat your question again?
I don't understand. |\n| 22 | Q.
Yes.
Did you ever come to find out that Twitter, in fact, |\n| 23 | took down many, many accounts that were attributed to be owned |\n| 24 | by the PRC and were critical of Mr. Guo? |\n| 25 | That's not a simple yes-or-no answer because my account was
A. |\n| | |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | taken down overnight, for one night, and was resumed.
So I |\n| 2 | can't say about Twitter's motivation. |\n| 3 | Q.
Did you ever read any articles about the fact that Twitter |\n| 4 | had taken down a bunch of accounts belonging to the -- strike |\n| 5 | that. |\n| 6 | Did you ever read any articles regarding the fact that |\n| 7 | Twitter had taken down accounts set up by the Chinese |\n| 8 | government? |\n| 9 | A.
I read Twitter, not articles.
On Twitter social media, not |\n| 10 | from a credible newspaper or that. |\n| 11 | Q.
I'm sorry, I can't remember if I covered this or not.
Go |\n| 12 | back to the first page of the letter, please.
In the fourth |\n| 13 | paragraph down, when you're discussing the preinterview that |\n| 14 | you had with Mr. Guo, you talked about -- I think we looked at |\n| 15 | it the same context of another article. |\n| 16 | I just want to confirm in this letter that when you |\n| 17 | wrote a letter to the United States government supporting his |\n| 18 | asylum application, you were aware of the fact that he had paid |\n| 19 | for office rentals and other things for the Ministry of State |\n| 20 | Security in China, right? |\n| 21 | A.
Yes.
He paid for their operation.
He paid for the spy |\n| 22 | agency's operation. |\n| 23 | Q.
And even though you knew that, you supported his |\n| 24 | application for asylum, right? |\n| 25 | Yes, because like any KGB spies in the States and if they
A. |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | defect, we support their asylum. |\n| 2 | Q.
And you referred to the government that, in exchange for |\n| 3 | payments that Mr -- or purchases that Mr. Guo made for the MSS, |\n| 4 | the MSS protected him from political attacks by his business |\n| 5 | rivals, right? |\n| 6 | A.
Yes, that's what he told me. |\n| 7 | Q.
And that's what you reported to the United States |\n| 8 | government, correct? |\n| 9 | A.
Yes, I did. |\n| 10 | Q.
Can we turn to Exhibit PX59, please.
Sorry, it should be |\n| 11 | PX59.
So the first pages of this document are just a |\n| 12 | certification, but I'd like to turn to page 3 of the article. |\n| 13 | I'm sorry.
Let's just look at the cover page first. |\n| 14 | So this is a -- just scroll to the top, please. |\n| 15 | So this is an article put out by the Stanford Cyber |\n| 16 | Policy Center.
In your role as a journalist, have you ever |\n| 17 | come across the Stanford Internet Observatory Cyber Policy |\n| 18 | Center? |\n| 19 | No.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
Skip two pages, please. |\n| 21 | And this is just the concept I was asking you about |\n| 22 | before.
I just want to put some context around it.
The first |\n| 23 | sentence of the article says:
\"On June 11th, 2020, Twitter |\n| 24 | announced the takedown of a collection of 23,750 accounts |\n| 25 | attributed to the People's Republic of China, with technical |\n\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | indicators linking the operation to the same actor responsible |\n| 2 | for the network of 200,000 suspended in August of 2019.\"
Do |\n| | |\n| 3 | you see that? |\n| 4 | Yes, I do.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
Before today, did you have any knowledge that that was the |\n| 6 | case? |\n| 7 | A.
No. |\n| 8 | Q.
And then just one more question on this.
Skip down to the |\n| 9 | second paragraph.
The first sentence, it says:
\"This |\n| 10 | June 2020, PRC-attributed operation had considerable topical |\n| 11 | overlap with the August 2019 operation, particularly concerning |\n| 12 | the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong and attacks on Chinese |\n| 13 | billionaire Guo Wengui now in exile in the United States.\"
Do |\n| 14 | you see the sentence that I just read? |\n| 15 | A.
I did. |\n| 16 | Q.
In your role as a journalist steeped in Chinese American |\n| 17 | politics, did this fact relating to Twitter takedowns come to |\n| 18 | your attention? |\n| 19 | Came to my attention a few years ago when my account was
A. |\n| 20 | suspended, and I wrote to Senator Rubio and he -- well, he -- I |\n| 21 | know he called the White House, and my account was recovered in |\n| 22 | like ten hours or something like that.
And I paid some |\n| 23 | attention, but at the time, I did not pay that much attention |\n| 24 | because I was not working as a journalist but a filmmaker. |\n| 25 | But are you -- you were aware, though, that Twitter took
Q. |\n| | |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
And did you send an initial liter to Lianchao Han? |\n| 2 | A.
Yes, I did. |\n| 3 | Q.
It's not the same as the letter we just looked at, is it? |\n| 4 | He made changes.
A. |\n| 5 | Q.
The initial letter you sent is at Exhibit 124; is that |\n| 6 | correct? |\n| 7 | A.
I have to -- I haven't seen the letter. |\n| 8 | Q.
Scroll through. |\n| 9 | A.
The initial letter is much shorter.
Yes.
That's the |\n| 10 | initial.
That's the first letter. |\n| 11 | Q.
So did Lianchao Han add substantial information to the |\n| 12 | letter you finally submitted? |\n| 13 | A.
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q.
And you still did agree with the information in the final |\n| 15 | letter, correct? |\n| 16 | A.
Yes, I did. |\n| 17 | Q.
I think you testified that you supported Mr. Guo because he |\n| 18 | thought he was a defector? |\n| 19 | I thought he was a defector from Chinese spy agency.
A. |\n| 20 | Q.
Would you still write this letter today based on what you |\n| 21 | know today? |\n| 22 | A.
I will not. |\n| 23 | Q.
Why not? |\n| 24 | A.
I think his role changed after that, and since then, he |\n| 25 | became a dissident hunter. |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q.
Have you withdrawn this letter? |\n| 2 | A.
I reported to FBI, and I explained to FBI, and I explained |\n| 3 | to U.S. government, including members of the United States |\n| 4 | Senate, Foreign Relations Committee, Intelligence Committee and |\n| 5 | United States House Foreign Affairs Committee and Intelligence |\n| 6 | Committee and FBI officials and some others.
I wrote letters |\n| 7 | to explain to them.
I reported to them and had communications |\n| 8 | with them. |\n| 9 | MR. GREIM:
Move the admission of Exhibit 124. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Any objection to that? |\n| 11 | MS. CLINE:
No, other than to say I was remiss to |\n| 12 | offer 123 as well. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Any objection to 123? |\n| 14 | MR. GREIM:
No. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
123 and 124 are received. |\n| 16 | (Defendant's Exhibits 123 and 124 received in |\n| 17 | evidence) |\n| 18 | MR. GREIM:
No further questions. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Are there any further exhibits -- |\n| 20 | directing myself to plaintiff, to Ms. Cline -- that you need to |\n| 21 | offer? |\n| 22 | MS. CLINE:
Sorry.
We'd like to offer as well PX59. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Any objection to PX59? |\n| 24 | MR. GREIM:
Yes, we do object to that. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
59 is -- |\n| | |\n\nof 168\n\nL4MPEAS6 Gong - Redirect MR. GREIM: Oh, your Honor, we actually did object to that before, and I think we maybe did not get a ruling on that in that initial batch of exhibits. THE COURT: Okay. 59 is received subject to a motion to strike. (Plaintiff's Exhibit PX59 received in evidence) THE COURT: Ms. Gong, you're excused with the thanks of the Court. THE WITNESS: Thank you. (Witness excused) THE COURT: All right. Before we address Ms. Wang, is there anything else that the plaintiffs have to offer in their case? MS. CLINE: No, your Honor. THE COURT: Is there anything else the defendants have to offer in their case besides the issue with respect to Ms. Wang? MR. GREIM: No, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Let me direct the question to Mr. Greim with respect to Ms. Wang. Mr. Greim, there were two questions that were open with respect to Ms. Wang. My question to you is, given everything else that we've done in this case, do you really need to ask those two questions? MR. GREIM: Your Honor, I think I do. And I have to say, I'm not exactly sure I'd break it down exactly as I did 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\nL4MPEAS6 Gong - Redirect of 168\n\nbut I just want to focus on the point that I want to make, which is, I would either like the witness to say that, yes, she agrees that Han Chunguang does not have information as to the million-dollar deposit, that that was really true, or I would like her to say that, you know, the reason that she didn't give it was for a reason that I think is not a valid one, but I think I want to get one or the other of those answers.\n\nTHE COURT: Don't you already have it in the record that Han Chunguang — I mispronounced the name — that Mr. Han's name was mentioned elsewhere in the interrogatory responses and not in response to the question about who knew about the Strategic agreement? I mean, I really question at this point whether you need it.\n\nMR. GREIM: I suppose if we can, I mean if we can - because, frankly, I don't believe that the witnesses -- I don't believe that her testimony was true, that she thought he did have information and withheld it. The thing that would have gotten her in trouble, and the direction she was headed, I think was incorrect. And so that's why it's a little ironic in that I don't want to establish that she falsely swore to that; I want to rely on that. And I suppose we can let it stand because we have her sworn answer to those interrogatories that that does not name Han Chunguang, so I'm talking myself into it. I don't think we do need to pursue it, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay.\n\nL4MPEAS6 Gong - Redirect of 168\n\n| 1 | Is there anything plaintiffs have? |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, if I may be heard, your Honor.
I |\n| 3 | just making sure we're all on the same page.
Is the |\n| 4 | interrogatory at issue No. 12, which is one that asks to |\n| 5 | identify each person with knowledge of Eastern's demand for the |\n| 6 | return of the \\$1 million deposit? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
No, I think it's -- |\n| 8 | MR. GREIM:
It's actually a few of them. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Yes, it's a number of interrogatory |\n| 10 | responses, and the interrogatories are in the record.
I left |\n| 11 | the testimony open because there was a question pending where I |\n| 12 | thought that the witness was at risk of incriminating herself |\n| 13 | in a crime and, for that reason, thought that before she had |\n| 14 | answered the question or answered the question further, that |\n| 15 | she should get the advice of counsel.
But the interrogatories |\n| 16 | themselves are in evidence.
Let me just look at my copy of the |\n| 17 | interrogatories. |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Is it also DX5, Mr. Greim? |\n| 20 | MR. GREIM:
It is, your Honor.
And -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
And I think the question went to the part |\n| 22 | of Interrogatory No. 5:
\"Identify each person with knowledge |\n| 23 | of the agreement, including the negotiation of the same.\" |\n| 24 | MR. GREIM:
That's right.
I don't think I asked every |\n| 25 | one of these, once we hit our roadblock, but it would really be |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | No. 5.
Let me just start, I'll just start from the beginning. |\n| 2 | I can make a record now or we can just argue it later because |\n| 3 | we've got this in the record, but I mean it would be No. 4, No. |\n| 4 | 5, No. 10, No. 11, No. 12, No. 13, No. 14 and No. 16. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Yes, I think you're just convincing |\n| 6 | yourself you don't need to ask that question. |\n| 7 | MR. GREIM:
I'm even more convinced now. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
All right. |\n| 9 | MR. GREIM:
And I would say No. 17. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
All right.
It's all in evidence.
If it |\n| 11 | were not in evidence, I'd receive it.
In any event, it's the |\n| 12 | admission of a party opponent. |\n| 13 | Is there anything else that you've got to add?
I |\n| 14 | don't need argument as to which version of the facts are |\n| 15 | truthful right now.
You'll argue that to me when we do closing |\n| 16 | arguments.
But, Ms. Cline, is there anything else? |\n| 17 | MS. CLINE:
I just think we have a difference of |\n| 18 | opinion as to whether the answers are accurate as drafted.
I'm |\n| 19 | somewhat concerned that there's this allegation that Ms. Wang |\n| 20 | has committed perjury and we haven't given her a chance to |\n| 21 | clean up the responses and to lay a foundation as to why we |\n| 22 | think they're accurate.
I understand that the responses are |\n| 23 | what they are, but it just feels -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
I left the record open only because there |\n| 25 | were questions that Mr. Greim was not permitted to ask that he |\n\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | wanted to ask and not for the proponent of the witness to clean |\n| 2 | up the testimony.
So I think you'll have to live with the |\n| 3 | record as the record is.
I think I was pretty clear that we |\n| 4 | concluded the testimony, you concluded your examination, |\n| 5 | Ms. Cline, and nobody asked further questions to clean up the |\n| 6 | interrogatories, unless there's something else I'm missing.
Am |\n| 7 | I missing anything? |\n| 8 | (Continued on next page) |\n| 9 | |\n| 10 | |\n| 11 | |\n| 12 | |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MS. CLINE:
May I have a moment? |\n| 2 | (Pause) |\n| 3 | MS. CLINE:
Yes, so we purposefully didn't address |\n| 4 | that on redirect because your Honor left it open with the |\n| 5 | understanding that she should retain counsel, which she's done, |\n| 6 | so that's why we didn't follow up. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
All right.
Well, listen, then is she here |\n| 8 | right now? |\n| 9 | MS. CLINE:
She is. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim, are you ready to examine her? |\n| 11 | MR. GREIM:
Your Honor, I actually don't have any |\n| 12 | questions for her. |\n| 13 | The other concern I have is that the record has been |\n| 14 | available to people listening to this outside — the witness may |\n| 15 | well have heard much more about this, and now she's had |\n| 16 | counsel, they may have been working with her — I don't want to |\n| 17 | put on a witness who has got a set of things -- I've got my |\n| 18 | responses here, I have nothing more to ask for that was.
It's |\n| 19 | the only reason we kept it open.
I have nothing more to go |\n| 20 | into. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Let me ask the question:
Is she going to |\n| 22 | take the Fifth as to any of the questions about the preparation |\n| 23 | of the interrogatories? |\n| 24 | MS. CLINE:
She's not. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Because I left it open, I'll permit her to |\n| | |\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\ntwo of you could work together to give me a single set of the exhibits that are in evidence or that have been shown to a witness, and the exhibits where there is still a motion to strike outstanding, in order, from PX 1 all the way through and then to the DX, because right now I've got a lot of different binders in front of me and instead of having to hunt around different binders, it would be helpful to just have a single set of exhibits. You can let me know what timetable that you will deliver it in but I think before closing statements might be useful. Is that too much to ask, Ms. Cline? MS. CLINE: I think we can handle it. THE COURT: Mr. Greim? MR. GREIM: Yes, we can do that, your Honor. THE COURT: Anything else, Ms. Cline, to raise with the Court? MS. CLINE: No, your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Greim? MR. GREIM: Do you want us to give you sort of a list of the adverse inference points, maybe questions that we had raised where we were asking for the inference? THE COURT: No, I don't think so. I think you should leave that for your closing argument. I would be troubled that there's a way in which that would give you an opportunity to make an argument that I'm not giving the plaintiff a chance to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\nmake an argument with respect to. I think I would have to give them an opportunity not just to rebut what you're saying but to highlight points that they want to highlight.\n\nMR. GREIM: Well, your Honor, knowing us, we probably would do that, so we'll just make our points in our closing. And if you want -- because I think this is this four-part test, if you want additional on that, I suppose you'll ask us and we can equally respond.\n\nTHE COURT: I think that's a simple enough question for me to do the research on.\n\nThere is one legal question that's come up in my work on the case that it would be useful to get very short supplemental briefs on. The plaintiffs have raised an argument that the research agreement is void under the Virginia Private Security Services Statute. There's very little law on that specific statute. There are two, I think, related questions that it would be helpful for me to get briefs on.\n\nNumber one, I would be interested in briefs with respect to the application of that statute to investigations that are done outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Several of the witnesses made a point of saying that the investigative work here was done outside of the State of Virginia, and if there is any case law on that, whether the statute should be interpreted to apply to conduct outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia and whether there would be any constitutional issues 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\n1\n\n2\n\nunder the Commerce Clause with the extension of it to activity outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia, would be helpful.\n\nThe second thing that's somewhat related is, I believe that there are similar statutes to the Virginia statute in other states. The interpretation by other courts of similar statutes is not going to be binding on me, but it occurs to me that the derth of case law under the Virginia statute might be filled in a bit by looking at the laws of some of the other states. So if you could look to see if there's anything useful to either of you in the law of other states and include that in the briefs, that would be helpful. I'm thinking that ten-page double-spaced briefs would be helpful, filed simultaneously. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12\n\nMs. Cline, can you remind me when we've got closing arguments in the case? 13 14\n\n15\n\n18\n\n19\n\nMS. CLINE: Friday, your Honor.\n\nTHE COURT: Is it too much to ask for it to be done by Friday, next Friday, close of day, the ten-page briefs? 16 17\n\nMS. CLINE: So you don't need them before the closings?\n\nTHE COURT: I don't think so. MS. CLINE: Fine for plaintiffs. THE COURT: For defendant? MR. GREIM: We can do it, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. I don't have anything else unless, Ms. Cline, you've 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | got anything? |\n| 2 | MS. CLINE:
Nothing from us. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Mr. Greim? |\n| 4 | MR. GREIM:
Nothing, your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I would say that I think the case was very |\n| 6 | well tried on both sides, and I appreciate your efforts to get |\n| 7 | it all done within this time frame and given the challenges |\n| 8 | with COVID. |\n| 9 | There was a point raised about the ability to judge |\n| 10 | credibility and to manage this with masks on, and the |\n| 11 | testimony, I think, has all come in well, and I have been able |\n| 12 | to make credibility judgments.
So thank you, all, for helping |\n| 13 | to make it work efficiently. |\n| 14 | MS. CLINE:
Thank you, your Honor. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 16 | (Adjourned to April 30, 2021 at 1:00 p.m.) |\n| 17 | * * * |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| 1 | INDEX OF EXAMINATION |\n|----|--------------------------------|\n| 2 | Examination of:
Page |\n| 3 | GUO WENGUI |\n| 4 | Cross By Mr. Greim 652 |\n| 5 | Redirect By Ms. Cline
. 752 |\n| 6 | SASHA GONG |\n| 7 | Direct By Mr. Greim
. 758 |\n| 8 | Cross By Ms. Cline 783 |\n| 9 | Redirect By Mr. Greim
. 800 |\n| 10 | PLAINTIFF EXHIBITS |\n| 11 | Exhibit No.
Received |\n| 12 | 52 and 53
. 753 |\n| 13 | 70A
. 754 |\n| 14 | PX44, 46, 47 and 50
. 792 |\n| 15 | PX59
. 803 |\n| 16 | DEFENDANT EXHIBITS |\n| 17 | Exhibit No.
Received |\n| 18 | 48
. 651 |\n| 19 | 51
. 667 |\n| 20 | DX76A
. 736 |\n| 21 | 35, 37, and 114
. 751 |\n| 22 | 123 and 124
. 802 |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |","body_zh":"证物 3\n\nL4MKEAS1\n\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT（美国联邦地区法院）\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK（纽约南区）\n\nEASTERN PROFIT CORPORATION LIMITED（东方利润有限公司），\n原告，\n诉 18 CV 2185 (LJL)\nSTRATEGIC VISION US LLC（战略愿景美国有限责任公司），\n被告。\n\n纽约州纽约市\n2021年4月22日\n上午9时37分\n审判长：\n尊敬的 LEWIS J. LIMAN（刘易斯·J·利曼）\n地区法院法官\n出庭人员\nTROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP（特劳特曼·佩珀·汉密尔顿·桑德斯律师事务所）\n原告代理律师\n代理律师：\nCHRISTOPHER B. CHUFF（克里斯托弗·B·查夫）\nJOANNA J. CLINE（乔安娜·J·克莱恩）\nGRAVES GARRETT LLC（格雷夫斯·加勒特有限责任公司）\n被告代理律师\n代理律师：\nEDWARD DEAN GREIM（爱德华·迪恩·格莱姆）\nJENNIFER A. DONNELLI（詹妮弗·A·多内利）\n另有在场者：\nMELISSA FRANCIS（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯），Eastern Profit Corporation Limited\n\nJ. MICHAEL WALLER（J·迈克尔·沃勒），Strategic Vision US LLC\n\nUNA WILKINSON（乌娜·威尔金森），普通话口译员\nLENNY YANG（莱尼·杨），普通话核对口译员\nJOSHUA KLEIN（约书亚·克莱因），Guo 先生代理律师\nPETRILLO, KLEIN & BOXER, LLP（彼得里洛、克莱因及博克瑟律师事务所）\n\n（继续开庭）\n\n法庭：早上好。\n\n有几项初步事项：\n\n第一，我昨晚收到一封电子邮件——实际上是两封电子邮件——有人告知法庭，这里的庭审程序正在被转播。首先，我想询问两位律师是否知道是谁在进行此事。显然，这些庭审程序正在 YouTube 上被转播。克莱恩女士，您对此知道些什么吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：不知道，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：格莱姆先生，您知道些什么吗？\n\n格莱姆先生：不知道，不知道，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：我今天上午将发布一项命令，提醒本程序中的所有当事人、所有参与者以及所有旁听者，无论其亲自到场、以虚拟方式出席还是远程出席，任何对本庭审程序的转播或再传输均违反法庭命令。此行为可受民事或刑事藐视法庭处罚，也将受到该等处罚。这是对任何可能正在收听本庭审程序之人的警告。该命令也将载入法庭案卷。\n\n第二，我收到被方对 PX 11 提出的异议。该异议予以驳回，该证物将获准接收，主要基于克莱恩女士在其函件中陈述的理由。文件是否真实、是否存在充分证据，尤其是是否存在充分证据使事实认定者能够确定该文件真实的问题，与我作为事实认定者是否将确定该文件真实的问题不同。\n\n我认定，原告已充分证明该文件真实，足以为将其接收为证据之目的。我的裁定不应被理解为预先判断该文件是否为真实的贷款协议；我推定将在作出事实认定时处理该问题。\n\n在我们开始之前，原告还有其他事项吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：有，法官阁下。我只是想知道，您是否可以作一下时间核算，仅为设定预期之目的？\n\n法庭：我会向您提供该信息。\n\n被告方有什么事项吗？\n\n格莱姆先生：法官阁下，只是一些程序性事项。证物 DX 48，即律师变更文件，昨天在询问 Han Chunguang（韩春光）时使用过。我们当时没有申请将其接收为证据，但今天上午想这样做。我们已与原告代理律师协商，并了解到对此没有异议。\n\n法庭：是这样吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：是，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：DX 48 获准接收。\n\n（被告证物 48 接收为证据）\n\n法庭：还有其他事项吗？\n\n格莱姆先生：就这些，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：我向各方提供更新后的用时总额。Eastern 已使用六小时四十九分钟。Strategic 已使用九小时二十九分钟。看来各方律师均接近其获分配时间的终点。在接近终点时，我将听取律师关于是否适宜延长期限的意见。我的意图是今天全天审理。我将在今天证言结束后处理有关 Wang 女士的问题，也将在今天结束审理。\n\n还有其他事项吗？\n\n格莱姆先生：法官阁下，我只想说，我们完全预计今天能够完成，并且会有数小时余裕。\n\n法庭：很好。\n\nGuo 先生，早上好。\n\n证人：早上好，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：提醒您，先生，您仍在宣誓之下。\n\n证人：是，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：律师，您可以询问。\n\nGUO WENGUI（郭文贵），\n继续交叉询问\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：Guo 先生，我将向您出示我们标记为证物 41 的文件。这是一篇《Wall Street Journal（华尔街日报）》文章，写于 2019年7月22日，内容正是关于本案；我告诉您，这是构成您本人针对 Strategic Vision 提起诉讼基础的文章之一。您记得吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：异议，法官阁下。至少我所看到的文件是英文的。我不确定证人是否能阅读。并且，我相信它也已被排除。\n\n法庭：驳回您的异议。据我理解，该文件目前并未被提出作为证据。是这样吗，格莱姆先生，您目前并不提出该文件作为证据？\n\n格莱姆先生：我们不提出，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：异议驳回。\n\n格莱姆先生：如果您可以向下滚动至——\n\n克莱恩女士：不过，法官阁下，就语言问题提出异议。它是英文的。\n\n法庭：我假定格莱姆先生会设法向证人展示该文件，要么由他用英语朗读，要么将其翻译。\n\n格莱姆先生：是的，我们会这样做。我们将使用就在这里的口译员来做这件事。\n\n法庭：Guo 先生，您会读英语吗？\n\n证人：（用英语）不会。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：您是否有一名名叫 Daniel Podhaskie（丹尼尔·波德哈斯基）的律师？\n\n答：有。\n\n问：他也是 Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）的总法律顾问？\n\n答：我实际上想说的是，他是 Golden Spring 的律师。\n\n问：您看到——而 Golden Spring New York 是您的家族办公室，对吗？\n\n答：那么，我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：Golden Spring 的律师是否代表您发表声明？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否记得 Podhaskie 先生代表您就该诉讼作出如下陈述：“Guo 先生是中国共产党在全球最想抓捕的异见人士，自抵达美国以来一直是他们最直言不讳且言辞最激烈的批评者”？\n\n您记得吗？\n\n答：嗯，我不知道文章中写了什么。我只是听到口译员在翻译，但我知道那是什么意思。\n\n问：我的问题是，您是否记得 Podhaskie 先生作出过该评论？\n\n答：我不记得。\n\n问：让我们再向上看几段。\n\n格莱姆先生：我请口译员朗读高亮部分，我将告诉 Guo 先生，口译员正在朗读这篇文章。她将用您的语言向您朗读。\n\n口译员：我可以朗读吗？\n\n（暂停）\n\n格莱姆先生：目前还没有待回答的问题。\n\n口译员：请稍等。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：格莱姆先生，让我向您建议一下，我感谢您试图以节省时间的方式处理此事，但为形成记录，您要么必须大声朗读该文字，要么，作为替代方案，并假设您的对方同意，您可以在证物上作标记，仅在其旁标注一个 A 以表明所读内容，然后该份作过标记的证物将成为您使用的证物。\n\n格莱姆先生：法官阁下，我想我会朗读，以便我们可以阅读庭审记录并理解其内容。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：翻译人员刚才朗读的部分是：“Podhaskie 先生在其声明中称，中国共产党官员已以极低价格出售 Guo 先生在中国价值约 USD $30 billion 的某些资产，并称 Guo 先生自开始公开发声反对他们以来，‘从未从中国或香港取出过一分钱。’”\n\n现在，Guo 先生，我的问题是，Podhaskie 先生是否代表您作出该声明？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：现在，Guo 先生，事实是，中国共产党通过冻结您在香港和中国大陆的资产对您进行报复，是这样吗？\n\n口译员：那么先让我翻译。\n\n克莱因先生：是。\n\n证人：我援引第五修正案。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：事实上，Guo 先生，您主张自开始公开发声以来，您没有从中国或香港取出过一分钱，这一主张是您作为异见人士之主张的核心，对吗？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：此外，当您于 2017 年秋季与 Waller 博士和 Wallop 女士会面时，您告诉他们，自您以异见人士身份开始公开发声以来，您无法从中国或香港取出一分钱，对吗？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n格莱姆先生：我现在将朗读该文章中的最后一段引文；在我为记录朗读之后，我将请翻译人员将您对此所见的内容翻译给证人。可以吗？\n\n法庭：不。我认为正确的做法是由翻译人员翻译您所说的内容，格莱姆先生。因此，您必须分段进行，让翻译人员翻译您所说的话，然后再引出问题。\n\n格莱姆先生：嗯，法官阁下，唯一的问题是，我想形成记录，表明翻译人员不一定是在说我所说的话，而是她实际上在朗读她在页面上看到的内容。\n\n法庭：您将朗读您在页面上看到的内容，然后翻译人员将翻译该内容。\n\n格莱姆先生：那么我们将做两遍，她先翻译我所说的话，然后她也向证人朗读页面上的内容？因为似乎该翻译，如果——如果问题是文件写了什么——\n\n法庭：可以，您可以按您原本打算的方式进行。\n\n格莱姆先生：好的。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：该文件写道：“Podhaskie 先生否认了那些指控，并称 Guo 先生和 Bannon 先生‘在有关中国的问题上有共同使命’，即‘清除共产党内部的激进干部。’”您同意 Podhaskie 先生所说的话，不是吗？\n\n答：我不记得。\n\n问：而且——我是在问他今天是否同意该说法。\n\n克莱因先生：法官阁下，我可以陈述意见吗？\n\n法庭：可以。\n\n克莱因先生：就询问 Guo 先生是否同意他与 Bannon 先生在有关中国的问题上有共同使命，即清除共产党内部激进干部的评论而言，我不反对他回答该问题。就问题是否是他同意 Podhaskie 先生否认那些指控而言，我不确定那是指什么。\n\n法庭：律师，您为什么不重新提问。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：Guo 先生，您是否同意 Podhaskie 先生的陈述，即您和 Bannon 先生“在有关中国的问题上有共同使命”，即“清除共产党内部的激进干部”？\n\n法庭：不，让我以稍微不同的方式提问。\n\nGuo 先生，您是否同意如下陈述：您和 Bannon 先生在有关中国的问题上有共同使命，即清除共产党内部的激进干部？\n\n证人：我不完全同意。\n\n格莱姆先生询问：\n\n问：您是否同意，Podhaskie 先生向《Wall Street Journal》作出那些评论时是在代表您发言？\n\n法庭：\n\n律师，您要与当事人商议吗？\n\n克莱因先生：\n\n我只是想问一下，所提出的问题是否是指他是否作出了那些言论，也就是具体指引号中的内容？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n是的。我换一种说法。\n\n由格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：您是否同意，Podhaskie先生在说您和Bannon先生在有关中国问题上有一项共同使命，即清除共产党内部的激进干部时，是在代表您发言？\n\n答：我不记得了。\n\n问：郭先生，您昨天刚刚作证称，超过99%的共产党党员都是正派的人，对吗？\n\n答：是的，我记得。\n\n问：事实上，我想您可能说的是99.99%；对吗？\n\n答：我实际上不记得我说的是99%还是99.9%。\n\n问：那么，因为该党有这么多人，我来问您：您是否认为中国共产党的99.99%的党员都是正派的人？\n\n答：不是。\n\n问：好的。那么更接近99%，是吗？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\nL4MKEAS1 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n答：问题在于，我确实无法用数学来衡量。每天，我们的口号都是推翻中共并改变其结构。我无法对此进行量化。\n\n问：郭先生，您的香港资产是在何时被冻结的？\n\n口译员：\n\n律师，律师。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n抱歉。\n\n口译员：\n\n是。\n\n证人：\n\n这只是我使用的一个形容词。\n\n由格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：郭先生，您的香港资产是在何时被冻结的？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：您的香港资产被冻结了吗？\n\n口译员：\n\n抱歉，律师？\n\n问：您的香港资产被冻结了吗？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：郭先生，我将向您出示两份证物。一份是英文并带有一些汉字，另一份是——让我看看，我以为我们已将其翻译——另一份是译文。\n\n我们正在展示的第一份文件是D-126B，随后在中间部分，同一份文件被翻译成了汉字。\n\n现在，郭先生，我向您陈述，第一份未翻译的文件是由Eastern Profit（东方利润）公司的律师在本案中提交的，并且Eastern Profit在其随附于该文件的信函中于本案中称，郭先生和Eastern Profit在香港被冻结的资产，并非由中共或中国大陆冻结，而是由High Court of Hong Kong（香港高等法院）冻结（见证物B）。这载于证物126的主文件中。1 2 3 4 5\n\n我们还将向您宣读的该部分翻译成了普通话，且其在您面前所见屏幕上已被突出显示，即证物126的后半部分。它位于该文件第5页，是最后两段。\n\n郭先生，您能否花一点时间自行阅读该部分。11 12\n\n（暂停）\n\n答：我读完了，但我实际上不太理解，不过我也援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：那么，我目前尚无待决问题，但让我作一记录并问您：您是否同意Eastern Profit的律师所称，您的资产在香港被冻结，并非由中共或中国大陆冻结，而是由香港高等法院冻结？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：现在，郭先生，您是否明白，Eastern Profit在本案中的立场实际上是由Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）根据授权委托书处理的？14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。24\n\n问：郭先生，您是否对Golden Spring New York行使控制权？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：郭先生，您是否对Eastern Profit就本诉讼的行为行使控制权？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：现在，郭先生，您此前曾接受过许多Mirror Media（明镜媒体）、也称Mingjing（明镜）的采访，对吗？\n\n答：是的。\n\n问：在2017年8月的一次采访中，您告诉Mirror Media主持人，您的香港资产已被冻结，对吗？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：在我们继续之前，让我们回到126B中文版本的第一页，也就是该裁定本身。那里有一行R1，即被申请人1。您在那里看到您的姓名了吗？\n\n答：您是指中文版本还是英文版本？\n\n问：我请您看您能够理解的版本，所以我问您——我推定是中文版本。\n\n答：律师，问题是什么来着？\n\n问：问题是：您是否在第一行以被申请人1的身份看到您的姓名？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否记得曾收到Hong Kong Special Administrative Region High Court（香港特别行政区高等法院）发出的裁定？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：您是否收到过这份裁定？\n\n克莱因先生：\n\n我能否商议片刻？\n\n法庭：\n\n可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：\n\n记录应当反映，证人正在与其个人律师商议。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n法官阁下，在口译员忙于工作期间，我能否以不会由口译员翻译的方式向法庭陈述？\n\n法庭：\n\n对此有异议吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n\n有，实际上。我认为证人应当能够听到将要说的内容。\n\n法庭：\n\n我可以在法官席旁听到您，所以何不以更稳妥的方式听您陈述。律师，我会听取您的陈述，并在听取后决定是否应当让证人知悉该事项。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n法官阁下，关于援引《宪法第五修正案》一事，我们考虑到，显然我们事先并不确切知道哪些议题会触发该修正案，但它看来涵盖了我们在本案中的一些核心问题。因此，在民事案件中，我们会请求作出不利推定。当然，问题在于确立对方当事人的代理关系，但即使是涉及代理关系的问题，也同样被援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\nL4MKEAS1 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n因此，我只是想确保，在今天郭先生仍在场时，我尽我所能奠定该证据基础。我想知道是否可以对究竟是什么程序或什么威胁导致此事进行一些调查，以便如果能够更精确地限定对《宪法》的援引，我们或许能够奠定更多该等证据基础。\n\n法庭：\n\n我会考虑该请求，但与此同时，您应当提出您的问题，我们将逐项处理。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n克莱恩女士：\n\n法官阁下，我可以发言吗？\n\n法庭：\n\n可以。\n\n克莱恩女士：\n\n据我了解，Strategic（战略公司）的时间刚刚届满。\n\n法庭：\n\n您是否申请延长时间？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n法官阁下，坦率地说，我以为如果我们到了当天结束时，该申请才会适用，但我已准备好现在就在此申请。我大约完成了三分之一的交叉询问。我们尚未能够通过我们的证人陈述我们的案件。今天我们将有充足的时间完成。我认为我没有浪费时间。我一直在努力聚焦于本案争议。\n\n法庭：\n\n那么，我将准许延长时间的申请，因为我认为您在大部分时间里没有浪费时间，而且您面对的证人否认了他们在证言录取中所说的事情，迫使您以他们的证言录取证词与他们对质。1 2 3\n\n因此，您可以继续。\n\n克莱因先生：\n\n法官阁下，在与郭先生商议后，据我了解，他准备回答关于他是否收到该文件的最后一个问题。\n\n法庭：\n\n很好。谢谢您，克莱因先生。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n好的。\n\n由格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：那么，我能否请您回答该问题？\n\n答：实际上，我从未收到过任何此类文件，当然也从未收到香港高等法院的此类文件；但是，我在网上看到过数百份——150种不同的——此类文件，据称指控我是强奸犯、杀人犯和黑帮分子，但我从未见过高等法院的正式文件。\n\n问：而且，郭先生，事实上，您告诉Waller博士和Wallop女士，您的香港资产已被冻结，对吗？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。18 19 20\n\n问：郭先生，让我们继续。\n\n自2017年以来，自您身处美国以来，您是否从事过任何营利性业务或职业？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。22 23 24\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n我请求调出证物51，我相信该证物也已翻译。让我们转到译文版本。\n\n由格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：实际上，郭先生，我将先向您出示该文件的前半部分，您将看到这是一份两页的声明。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n请将页面滚动到底部，查看签名。\n\n问：郭先生，这是您的签名吗？\n\n答：看起来像我的签名。\n\n问：好的。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n请继续使用中文版本。请将页面滚动到顶部。\n\n问：现在，您是否认出这是您在针对一名名为Hongkuan Li（李洪宽）的人提起的诉讼中提交的宣誓书或声明？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n问：郭先生，您是否在United States District Court for the District of Maryland（美国马里兰联邦地区法院）起诉了Hongkuan Li？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否提交了一份支持您诉讼的声明？\n\n答：我援引《宪法第五修正案》。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n法官阁下，我并不完全确定《宪法第五修正案》是否保护任何人免于就其是否作出公开提交文件而作证。\n\n法庭：\n\n我将首先听取克莱因先生关于就这些问题援引《宪法第五修正案》的善意依据之陈述，然后我们将决定是否准许询问。\n\nL4MKEAS1 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n克莱因先生：\n\n法官阁下，我认为——我对我未参与的其他诉讼中提交文件的相关情况并没有全面了解。我不知道我的当事人的具体参与情况，我不知道完整背景；在被问及他是否提交了属于表述性文件的特定文件时，这可能被解释为承认某些事项，可能被解释为涉及其参与程度或意图。我只是没有足够的信息来理解这些文件的相关背景。\n\n如果我有更多信息，或者问题或许是——我认为有些问题，只要他具有个人知情，他可以回答，但我甚至不知道他对这些文件记得什么，或者他对这些文件知道什么，或者这些文件制作和提交的相关情况，而且我没有时间考虑可能存在何种影响，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n让我问律师一个问题。首先，格雷姆先生，您只是试图为接纳该文件奠定证据基础吗？23 24 25\n\n格雷姆先生：\n\n是的。\n\n法庭：\n\nEastern是否对将DX 51作为郭先生的陈述予以采纳提出异议？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n\n我能否与克莱因先生商议？我很抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n克莱恩女士：\n\n因此，我可以代表Eastern表示，我们不反对接纳该证物。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\n那么，DX 51作为郭先生的一项陈述、先前陈述予以接纳。\n\n（被告方证物51被接纳为证据）\n\n由格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：郭先生，您是否指控Hongkuan Li诽谤您？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：诽谤性陈述是什么？\n\n克莱因先生：\n\n法官阁下，我能否商议？\n\n法庭：\n\n可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：\n\n证人是否需要重述问题？\n\n证人：\n\n（用英语）是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n请法庭书记员重述该问题。\n\n（宣读记录）\n\nL4MKEAS1 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n证人：\n\n（通过口译员）我不需要重述。我可以回答该问题。\n\n答：嗯，这是因为Hongkuan Li在YouTube上，超过……\n\n4 YouTube频道上，他在其广播中逾600次谈及强奸我的妻子、我的女儿、我的母亲，并以言语侮辱她们，因此我不想深入谈论此事，但我需要援引第五修正案；不过，如果您有问题，我会回答。\n9 GREIM先生：\n10 问：那么，Guo先生（郭文贵），您在该案中的主张是，该等行为使您在香港和中国大陆蒙受业务损失，对吗？\n12 答：我援引第五修正案的保护。\n13 问：并且您声称，您实际上预期工作会再延续一年，进入2019年；对吗？\n15 口译员：律师，我没有听清您的问题。\n16 问：您主张，Li先生的行为使您又损失了一年延续至2019年的工作，对吗？\n18 答：我援引第五修正案。\n19 问：ACA的哪位人士曾就Li的帖文与您商谈？\n21 答：我援引第五修正案。\n22 问：Guo先生，事实上，您在2017年和2018年通过China Golden Spring（中国黄金泉）收取资金，以从事香港和中国大陆的工作，对吗？\n25 答：我援引了第五修正案。\n\n1 问：您受ACA聘用，是为了向中国和香港的众多企业高管作介绍，对吗？\n3 答：我援引第五修正案。\n4 问：如果没有Li的诽谤性帖文，您预期会继续从事该项工作至2019年？\n6 答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n7 问：Guo先生，我想您昨天作证称，您已申请庇护，且该申请仍在审理中；对吗？\n10 答：是。\n11 问：Lianchao Han（韩连潮）协助您提出该申请，是吗？\n13 答：我不太明白您所说的他帮助我是什么意思。\n14 问：他是否就准备该申请向您提供建议？\n15 答：我不理解意见的标准。这是什么意思？\n17 问：他是否与您一起处理该申请？\n18 答：嗯，很难说他是否确实帮助填写了申请，因为他并非当着我的面填写的；但问题是，通过代理律师，通过律师，他们或许向他提供了一些建议，而他提供了帮助。\n22 问：Lianchao Han先生——让我这样问：他是否与您讨论过您的庇护申请？\n24 CLINE女士：异议；无关。\n25 法庭：驳回异议。\n\n1 证人：没有。\n2 GREIM先生：\n3 问：Guo先生，您上一次与Lianchao Han交谈是什么时候？\n4 答：大约一年半到两年前。我记不太清了。\n6 问：就在您在本案中进行证言录取之前，您曾向他发短信，以获取关于本案的事实，是吗？\n8 答：我从未与他谈过本案。我当时非常生他的气。\n10 问：他曾就您是否提起本诉讼向您提供建议，是吗？\n11 答：他实际上坚持反对——他坚持不推进本诉讼。事实上，我怀疑他可能与这两个骗子勾结。\n14 问：Guo先生，Sasha Gong（龚小夏）向您介绍了Bill Gertz（比尔·格茨），是吗？\n16 答：嗯，我不——我不确定是否仅由她向我介绍Bill Gertz。很多人都向我介绍过Bill Gertz。\n19 问：Bill Gertz有很多关系——嗯，首先，您认识Bill Gertz吗？\n21 答：嗯，很多年了。事实上，在中国，我们都读过他的文章，我们都是他的粉丝。\n23 问：并且您知道他在Washington, D.C.（华盛顿哥伦比亚特区）有很多关系，是吗？\n25 答：这点我不知道。\n\n1 问：您知道他是所谓的对华鹰派吗？\n2 答：我知道他被称为——他有一个称号，叫反CCP（中国共产党）英雄。我不知道他是哪种鹰派。\n4 问：Gertz写过一本关于您的书，是吗？\n5 口译员：律师，您能重复一下吗？\n6 GREIM先生：当然。\n7 GREIM先生：\n8 问：Gertz写过一本关于您的书，是吗？\n9 答：我不知道。\n10 问：您知道Gertz写过一本名为“Deceiving the Sky”的书吗？\n12 答：我知道他写过一本关于反共的书。中文书名是“瞒天过海”。这一点我知道。\n15 问：Gertz先生曾向您要求预付该书的版税，是吗？\n17 答：您的意思是我向他支付版税？\n18 问：是。\n19 问题是：他曾向您要求预付版税，是吗？\n21 KLEIN先生：法官阁下——\n22 GREIM先生：我将撤回这个问题，以便我们可以更快进行。我撤回该问题。\n24 GREIM先生：\n25 问：Guo先生，您向William Je介绍了Gertz先生，是吗？\n\n1 口译员：律师，您是说他作了介绍吗？\n4 GREIM先生：Gertz先生向William Je作介绍。\n5 口译员：好的。\n6 KLEIN先生：法官阁下，我可以商议一下吗？\n7 法庭：可以。\n8 （暂停）\n9 法庭：Guo先生，您需要重述问题吗？\n10 证人：不需要。我援引第五修正案。\n11 GREIM先生：\n12 问：Guo先生，您是否知道William Je随后向Gertz先生预付了$100,000？\n14 答：我援引第五修正案。\n15 问：Guo先生，您在12月的会面中告诉Waller博士和Wallop女士，您想要消灭CCP和Xi Jinping（习近平）；对吗？\n18 答：（用英语）百分之百。\n19 问：您还告诉他们，Yvette Wang（王雁平）仍是共产党党员，是吗？\n21 答：是。\n22 问：而事实上，在2017年12月，她仍是共产党党员吗？\n24 答：不是。\n25 问：那么，您对他们撒谎了吗？\n\nL4MKEAS1 Guo（郭文贵）—交叉询问 168\n\n1 答：因此，我对他们所说的是，她曾经是CCP成员，但在2017年12月——在2017年12月，她事实上并非CCP成员，因为如果您是CCP成员，您确实需要缴纳党费。而且，她没有缴纳党费；而且，她与像我这样反共的人在一起，因此她不再是CCP成员，您的问题是一个误导性问题。\n8 问：Guo先生，您记得在2019年8月就本案进行证言录取吗？\n10 答：记得。\n11 问：我向您提问，您在宣誓后、在承担伪证罪责任的情况下对答案作出保证，对吗？\n13 答：是。\n14 GREIM先生：我将请证人观看该次证言录取的一段录像，即证物JX 4，第30:19行至第32:2行。\n17 （播放录像）\n18 口译员：我听不见。有字幕吗？\n19 GREIM先生：没有字幕。您会听到我提出的问题、他的回答，然后会听到翻译。\n22 （播放录像）\n23 （下页续）\n\n1 问：Guo先生，您作出过该证言吗？\n2 答：是。\n3 问：并且该证言是真实的？\n4 答：是。\n5 问：您意图通过媒体向中国人民发布该项目的信息；对吗？\n7 答：我不明白。\n8 问：如果Strategic Vision（战略视野）制作出您所寻求的内容，您是否会随后通过媒体向中国人民发布该等信息？\n11 答：不会。\n12 问：我将——我们再次转到JX4。\n13 被告：法官阁下，我想与我的律师Joanna商议。\n15 法庭：您可以简短商议。是与CLINE女士商议，还是仅与Guo先生的个人律师商议？\n17 证人：还有Joanna。\n18 法庭：好的。简短进行。\n19 （暂停）\n20 证人：那么我是要说什么，还是要回答什么？\n22 法庭：不。\n23 GREIM先生：\n24 问：那么现在我们将向您展示，Guo先生，这是JX4中您8月的证言录取，第207:25行至第208:12行。好的。\n\n1 （播放录像）\n2 问：Guo先生，那是您于2019年8月2日作出的证言，不是吗？\n4 答：是。\n5 问：并且那是真实的，不是吗？\n6 答：是。\n7 问：Guo先生，您从未向Strategic披露Eastern Profit（东方利润），是吗？\n9 答：嗯，实际上是Yvette——Wang Yan Ping（王雁平）和Han——嗯，我不知道，我没有向该公司披露Eastern Profit或Han Chunguang（韩春光）。\n12 问：Guo先生，为就与Strategic谈判研究协议之目的，您是Eastern的代理人，不是吗？\n14 答：我是代理人？\n15 问：这正是我的问题。\n16 答：但我从未担任Eastern Profit的代理人。\n17 问：Guo先生，您在研究协议谈判中代表Eastern行事，并且您在该角色下向Strategic作出的陈述对Eastern具有约束力；对吗？\n21 口译员：律师，您介意我重复翻译吗？\n23 答：嗯，我没有非常深入地参与研究协议的讨论。所有讨论均由Wang Yan Ping以及Han Lianchao进行。我从未告诉该公司我代表任何人。\n\n1 问：Guo先生，如果您得知Eastern Profit在本案中采取了相反立场，您会感到惊讶吗？\n4 答：不会惊讶。\n5 问：事实上，就在刚才，您将Eastern Profit的律师称为您的律师，对吗？\n7 答：谁代表Eastern Profit？\n8 问：嗯，坐在我左边的律师——\n9 口译员：律师，您能——\n10 GREIM先生：您能翻译证人刚才所说的话吗？\n12 口译员：实际上，我没有准确听到他刚才说了什么。我当时在告诉他不要说话。您希望我问他吗？\n15 YANG先生：他提到那是口误。\n16 法庭：让我问您几个问题，Guo先生。\n18 证人：（用英语）是，法官阁下。\n19 法庭：您看到我面前第一张桌子旁的那位女律师了吗？您看到她了吗？\n21 证人：（用英语）是。\n22 （通过口译员）是。\n23 法庭：刚才您向我提到她时，您以她的名字称呼她，对吗？\n25 证人：是。\n\n1 法庭：您今天作证之前曾与她会面吗？\n3 证人：没有。\n4 法庭：让我换一个更好的问题。在您来此作证之前，您曾与原告方的律师会面吗？\n7 证人：没有。\n8 法庭：您怎么知道她的名字？\n9 证人：嗯，因为在此之前，我的内部律师告诉我今天谁会出席。\n11 法庭：他以她的名字称呼她？\n12 证人：是。\n13 CLINE女士：法官阁下——\n14 法庭：不。律师，您可以询问。\n16 GREIM先生：\n17 问：Guo先生，您刚才提到的内部律师是谁？\n18 答：我们的内部律师，他们不在这里，而且这位也是我的律师。\n20 问：您刚才提到的内部律师叫什么名字？\n22 答：此前是Daniel。他是Golden Spring的律师。\n23 问：Daniel Podhaskie（丹尼尔·波德哈斯基）？\n24 答：是。\n25 法庭：他就是告诉您有关CLINE女士情况的那个人？\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.（纽约南区庭审记录服务专业公司）\n\n(212) 805-0300\n\n1 证人：是。\n3 GREIM先生：\n4 问：我不会超出这个问题继续询问，但Podhaskie先生会告诉您有关本案的事情吗，Guo先生？\n6 答：是的，是Podhaskie先生和我在这里的律师。\n7 问：Guo先生，他会接受您的指示吗？\n8 答：不会。\n9 问：他会做您要求他做的事情吗？\n10 答：不会。\n11 问：您知道他向谁负责吗？\n12 答：Golden Springs。\n13 问：他在Golden Spring的上司是谁？\n14 答：我援引第五修正案。\n15 问：Guo先生，您知道Golden Spring的老板是谁吗？\n16 答：第五修正案。\n17 问：我的问题是，是否只有您知道，Guo先生？\n18 答：我援引第五修正案。\n19 问：Guo先生，您是否主张您与Podhaskie先生之间的通信享有特权？\n21 答：是。\n22 问：他是否向您提供法律意见？\n23 答：是。\n24 问：并且他是否就本案向您提供法律意见？\n25 答：是。\n\n1 问：\n郭文贵（Ho Wan Kwok）先生，我想暂时回到连潮·韩（Lianchao Han）的问题上。韩先生是否曾与您讨论过，本合同项下的调查研究结果将与媒体分享？\n\n2 答：\n我们确实讨论过，如果有调查结果，我们将进行调查，然后在美国对他们提起指控，但我们没有详细讨论此事。\n\n3 问：\n郭先生，您一直——\n\n4 口译员：\n律师，您必须——\n\n5 格雷姆（Greim）律师：\n哦，抱歉。\n\n6 答：\n我还提到，在调查程序完成后，我们可以将其与媒体分享。\n\n7 问：\n郭先生，直至您于2019年8月作证时，您与连潮·韩一直保持良好关系，对吗？\n\n8 答：\n不，事实上，自从这次7月的事件发生后，我们的关系就一直不好。\n\n9 问：\n韩先生至少一直在处理您的庇护申请直到2018年3月，对吗？\n\n10 答：\n嗯，自从这件事发生后，自从这个7月以来，我收到那个里面装着垃圾的U盘后，自从那件事发生后，我们的关系就不好。因此，我此刻不记得他为庇护案件做过什么帮助，我不记得。\n\n11 问：\n但在您作证前，为了获取事实，您确实与他发过短信，对吗？\n\n1 答：\n我不记得。\n\n2 问：\n为便于记录，我们将播放联合证物4（JX4）第65页第11行至第65页第17行。\n\n3 （播放视频）\n\n4 问：\n那是您的证词，对吗，郭先生？而且那是真实的？\n\n5 答：\n是。\n\n6 问：\n郭先生，您是下令于2017年12月29日或前后将总计 \\$1 million 电汇给战略愿景公司（Strategic Vision）的人，对吗？\n\n7 口译员：\n律师，您要不要为我重复一下日期？\n\n8 格雷姆律师：\n2017年12月29日。\n\n9 克莱因（Klein）律师：\n法官阁下，我可以商议一下吗？\n\n10 法官：\n可以。\n\n11 （暂停）\n\n12 答：\n我援引第五修正案。\n\n13 问：\n郭先生，您知道这是东盛（Eastern Profit）在本案中的立场吗？\n\n14 答：\n我可以问——\n\n15 法官：\n克莱因律师，您需要商议吗？\n\n16 克莱因律师：\n是的，法官阁下，请允许。\n\n17 （暂停）\n\n18 法官：\n您需要再听一遍问题吗？\n\n19 证人：\n不，我援引第五修正案。\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - 交叉询问 168\n\n格雷姆律师：法官阁下，我们希望就我们认为——正在开始认定——并非善意援引第五修正案一事留存记录。我并非轻率地这么说，但我想解释原因。\n\n纽约金泉（Golden Spring New York）的内部法律顾问向文贵先生提供意见，并就本案向他提供意见。纽约金泉的内部法律顾问正与东盛同坐于律师席。纽约金泉在本案中依据东盛的授权委托书担任其代理人。\n\n我所问的只是，证人是否知道东盛在这样做，而我们得到的回答是援引第五修正案。很难想象这会涉及何种可能被援引的刑事事项；作为审阅过全部事实的人，我想不出是什么。\n\n法官：让我问您几个问题。首先，您的目的是要建立一个基础，以便我对东盛作出不利推定，如同郭先生本人是本案原告一样吗？\n\n格雷姆律师：是。\n\n法官：好的。那么，克莱恩（Cline）律师，我问您：您是否争议，我可以因援引第五修正案而对东盛作出不利推定，如同郭先生是本案原告一样？\n\n我并不是说我会作出该推定，而只是说，为决定是否作出不利推定之目的，我可以将二者等同看待吗？\n\n克莱恩律师：那么，法官阁下，据我了解，不利推定的归责适用基于若干因素，其中之一据我理解类似于代理关系。如果这有帮助，我可以说，我相信本案我的前任律师已经承认，郭先生是作为东盛的代理人行事。因此，这一点我愿意承认。\n\n我不愿承认分析中不存在其他因素。我站在这里，并不确定我已准备好承认那些因素，但我们当然会承认代理关系。\n\n法官：这对您来说已经足够了吗，格雷姆律师？\n\n格雷姆律师：我认为这些因素——我认为有几种不同的方式可以证明这一点，也有几个因素。我有一份备忘录，但目前不在手边；不过我想说，我认为这还不完全足够。关于代理关系的承认，涉及合同谈判以及在谈判合同过程中作出的陈述。\n\n但郭先生未回答的一些陈述，可以说并非合同谈判的一部分。它们涉及诸如合同履行之类的事项，或更普遍地确立郭先生对这些当事方控制权的事项，因此我不确定我们是否已经完全达到那一步。我认为我们离那一步已经很近了，但我们可能还需要更多。\n\n法官：嗯，我会听取您的意见，但我原先理解克莱恩律师的意思不仅是，郭先生为谈判基础合同之目的担任代理人，而且是，就我为决定是否因其证词对东盛作出推定而需要进行的分析中的该项要素而言，她承认该项已经满足。不过，格雷姆律师，请说。\n\n格雷姆律师：四项因素是郭先生对东盛的忠诚、郭先生对东盛的控制程度、本诉讼中的共同利益，以及郭先生在本诉讼中具有足够显著的角色。\n\n因此，我认为郭先生对东盛的忠诚已经确立。就他承认代表东盛谈判此事，并且显然试图在本诉讼中帮助东盛这一事实而言——\n\n法官：让我打断您，格雷姆律师。\n\n格雷姆律师：好的。\n\n法官：那么，克莱恩律师，基于这四项因素，您是否同意，我可以对东盛作出不利推定，其程度与郭先生本人是本诉讼当事人时相同？\n\n换言之，为作出不利推定之目的，所有这四项因素均已满足吗？\n\n1 克莱恩律师：\n我可以与我的当事人商议吗？\n\n2 法官：\n可以。\n\n3 （暂停）\n\n4 克莱恩律师：\n法官阁下，除已经作出的关于代理关系这一点的承认外，我们尚未准备承认任何事项。\n\n5 法官：\n好的。克莱恩律师，让我再问您一个问题，然后我再交回给格雷姆律师。刚才在我的法庭内，您与郭先生及其个人律师进行了商议。您是否就该次商议主张特权？\n\n6 克莱恩律师：\n是。\n\n7 法官：\n依据是什么？换一种说法，我是否可以公平地假定，依据是东盛与郭先生之间存在共同利益？\n\n8 克莱恩律师：\n是的，法官阁下，因此，他是——就本诉讼而言，我们立场一致，并且我们曾就本诉讼进行商议。\n\n9 法官：\n就本诉讼而言，你们立场一致，这是您所说的吗？\n\n10 克莱恩律师：\n是的，法官阁下。\n\n11 法官：\n因此，就本诉讼而言，你们存在共同利益；正确吗？\n\n12 克莱恩律师：\n我同意这一点，是的。\n\n13 法官：\n格雷姆律师，您还需要什么？然后我将考虑，您想要质疑哪些问题，以质疑主张该特权的善意基础。\n\nL4MPEAS2 Kwok - 交叉询问 168\n\n格雷姆律师：嗯，法官阁下，如果他们对诉讼结果具有共同利益，我认为这比该测试所要求的共同利益更强。该证人在本诉讼中具有显著角色。\n\n法官：再次让我打断您。我目前不想决定我是否可以作出不利推定，而且坦率地说，也不想决定不利推定是否适当。这将取决于相关问题以及我从问题中作出的推定；而郭先生是否与东盛相同，以便作出推定，将取决于对判例法的分析。我面前没有判例法。\n\n我此刻所要做的，只是看看我们是否需要质疑该特权的善意主张。我试图避免必须这样做，因为我认为本院已表达了可以理解的保留态度；但如果您需要建立更多记录，那么请告诉我您认为需要做什么，我将决定您是否可以这样做。\n\n格雷姆律师：法官阁下，我认为——让我这样做。我认为最好的做法是继续提问，看看此事会在何处再次出现。我只是担心我会在这个问题上花费太多时间，无法完成。\n\n1 法官：\n继续吧。我们暂且保留这个问题。\n\n2 格雷姆律师询问：\n\n3 问：\n郭先生，您是否记得，在2018年1月下旬，伊薇特·王（Yvette Wang）曾告知您，她认为战略愿景公司未能就这15个对象找到充分信息？\n\n4 答：\n嗯，我知道，在我与那两个人见面之后，我根本没有得到任何信息。我不记得那是什么时候。\n\n5 问：\n您是否记得，战略愿景公司因第一组15个姓名存在问题而向您索要新的姓名？\n\n6 答：\n嗯，我模糊记得发生过类似的事，但第一次或第二次，我提供的姓名基本上是王岐山及与他有关的人。我不记得其他任何人。\n\n7 问：\n不过，您是否记得，战略愿景公司要求提供新的姓名，以替换原始名单中的一些姓名？\n\n8 答：\n我不记得。\n\n9 问：\n您是否记得，您拒绝向战略愿景公司提供新的姓名？\n\n10 答：\n我不记得。\n\n11 问：\n郭先生，我只是想确认我理解正确。当您说“我不记得”时，您的意思是您可能做过但记不起来，还是您没有做过？\n\n12 答：\n嗯，我确实不记得了，就像您刚才给我看的两个视频一样，我不记得，但问题是，我认为那是可以的，而且那就是发生的事，不过我不记得。\n\n13 问：\n您知道韩春光（Han Chunguang）是谁吗？\n\n14 答：\n知道。\n\n15 问：\n他是谁？\n\n16 答：\n他是东盛的老板。\n\n17 问：\n您如何知道他是东盛的老板？\n\n18 答：\n嗯，那一家人在中国非常成功，有很多生意；所以他们成立了这家公司。\n\n19 问：\n不过，您的女儿是东盛的唯一董事，对吗？\n\n20 答：\n我不知道。\n\n21 问：\n郭先生，您最后一次见到韩春光是什么时候？\n\n22 答：\n嗯，昨天我在来这里的路上见到了他，我想几天前我也见到了他。\n\n23 问：\n您经常见他，对吗？\n\n24 答：\n我不明白“经常”的定义是什么意思，但当我需要见他时，我可以见他。\n\n25 问：\n您何时需要见他？\n\n26 答：\n嗯，有很多有关推翻中国共产党（CCP）的事情需要处理；所以当我需要见他时，我会见他。\n\n27 问：\n您会要求与他会面吗？\n\n28 答：\n我不明白那是什么意思。\n\n29 问：\n您会请他与您会面吗？\n\n30 答：\n嗯，在我们所有支持推翻中国共产党的人之间，若我们需要……\n\n讨论，或者我们就见面。\n\n没有任何关于是谁请求谁或是谁邀请谁的内容。我们有共同的使命。\n\n问：他非常频繁地来你的公寓，不是吗？\n\n答：我相信，在过去两年里，他来我住处不超过十次，或者不超过五次。\n\n问：我在2019年8月对你进行了证言录取，你记得吗？\n\n答：记得。\n\n问：你还记得，你说过在进行证言录取的那天早上刚见过他吗？\n\n答：我确实不记得那次证言录取中发生了什么。我不记得。\n\n问：我们播放JX4，第115页，第19至22行。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n那是你的证言，不是吗，Guo先生？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且那是真实的？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：但你当时证称，你不知道Han Chunguang（韩春光）为什么来你的大楼，不是吗？\n\n答：我只是不记得我——我只是不记得我当时说了什么。我可能说过那样的话。我现在此时不记得了。我现在在法庭上，只是在告诉你我的感受。在这一刻，我不记得。\n\nL4MPEAS2\nKwok - 交叉询问\n\n问：在2019年8月，你说你不知道Han Chunguang（韩春光）为谁工作，也不知道是谁给他分派工作，你记得吗？\n\n答：嗯，我只是不记得我当时说了什么，因为，比如说，我有50个案件。我不记得是哪一天、说了什么、何时说的。我现在在法庭上所能告诉你的只是，我不记得。\n\n问：好。我们就——继续往下进行。让我问你这个问题，Guo先生。你何时得知Han Chunguang是Eastern Profit（东方盈利）的老板？\n\n答：我不记得具体时间。\n\n问：你是否记得，我在你的证言录取中问你Han Chunguang是否参加了与Strategic（战略）的会议，以讨论该合同，而你笑了？你记得吗？\n\n答：嗯，也许我当时想，就像之前一样，也许我确实说过我记得，但我们可以以那个答案为依据；但在这一刻，我不记得。\n\n问：Guo先生，我们将播放JX4，第——抱歉，第158页，第5至15行。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n你记得那份证言吗，Guo先生？\n\n答：记得。我现在看了视频后，我的记忆被唤起了，现在我记得了。\n\n问：而且在那次证言录取中，你对我的回答完全真实且诚实吗，Guo先生？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：Guo先生，Han Chunguang实际上是你的男仆，不是吗？\n\n答：谁这么说的？\n\n问：这是我的问题。\n\n答：不是。\n\n问：他为你做饭？他为你做饭吗？\n\n答：有几次。嗯，有几次，但问题是，在中国传统中，男人做饭是一种美德，所以我们作为朋友和家人有时会彼此做饭。我实际上也在直播中做过饭。\n\n问：他替你跑腿，不是吗？\n\n答：不是。\n\n问：你有客人来时，他曾为你做饭并把食物端给客人，不是吗？\n\n答：不是。\n\n问：Guo先生，如果你如此确定Han Chunguang是Eastern——让我问你这个问题——撤回该问题。你是否曾与你的女儿谈过Eastern Profit？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：她住在这一地区吗？\n\n答：不住。\n\n问：你经常见到她吗？\n\n答：非常少。\n\n问：不过她在美国，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：所以，如果Han Chunguang是Eastern Profit的老板，他为什么没有和本案的律师一起坐在这里；你知道吗？\n\nCLINE女士：异议。缺乏基础。\n\n法庭：驳回。我理解他不在律师席上，对吗？他没有和律师一起在法庭内？\n\nCLINE女士：正确，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好。已有基础。异议驳回。\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：嗯，你说你经常见到他。你是否曾与他谈论本案？\n\n答：没有。\n\n口译员：律师，您介意我就一件事向证人澄清吗？\n\n答：好的。所以，我强调的是，从2019年底至今，Han Chunguang来我18层公寓的次数不超过五次。\n\n问：我明白了。所以，在你的证言录取之后，他就不再那么频繁地来你的公寓了；对吗？\n\n答：不是。我只是指你之前提出的问题。我只是说，我并不是真的每天都和他交谈。\n\n问：William Je（威廉·杰）是谁？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：Guo先生，你在本案中证称William Je是你的朋友，对吗？\n\nKLEIN先生：法官阁下，我可以暂时商议一下吗？\n\n法庭：可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：好。Guo先生，你需要再听一遍问题吗？\n\n答：嗯，William Je可能是ACA的董事。\n\n问：好的。我的问题是，他是否也是你的朋友？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你认识他很久了，不是吗？\n\n答：嗯，我不知道你所说的“很久”是什么意思。\n\n问：十年？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：十五年？\n\n答：我现在记得不是很清楚。\n\n问：你信任他，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：你认为他反中国共产党，对吗？\n\n答：当然。\n\n问：他这样告诉过你，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：在你要求他这样做时，他会向各处汇款，不是吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：你是否记得，之前我们看过你在Hongkuan Li（李宏宽）诉讼中提交的一份宣誓书；你记得吗？\n\n答：记得。\n\n问：ACA中告诉你有关诽谤性帖文的人，是William Je吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：William Je是否是你正努力向香港及中国大陆的高管介绍的人？\n\n答：我不太明白。\n\n问：嗯，你是否记得，你向马里兰州的法院陈述，你与ACA交易的目的是由你向他们介绍香港及中国大陆的高管和商业机会？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：现在，你知道William Je在中国大陆已经有很多人脉，不是吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且他是在多年间通过为Macquarie（麦格理）撰写Greater China Desk（大中华台）而建立这些人脉的，对吗？\n\n答：也许。\n\n问：你知道他曾经——\n\n口译员：停。应当是“应当是”。\n\n问：你知道他曾担任中国大陆数个市政府的经济顾问，对吗？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：他是否曾向你提及此事？\n\n答：我不记得。\n\n问：你有多少——让我问你这个问题。你是否知道William Je与Chongqing市（重庆市）有任何关联？\n\n答：现在，也许他提到过类似的事情，但你知道，在香港，很多人谈论那个，说自己是中国共产党党员。但是，你知道——不是共产党党员，而是很多人说他们是亲属——\n\n口译员：抱歉，我说得有些杂乱。\n\n答：所以我——也许他说过，但我不记得，而且我不会对此负责，并且——\n\n（暂停）\n\n但是，他可能说过他是CPPCC（中国人民政治协商会议）成员，但香港很多人都这么声称。所以他可能说过，但我不对此负责。\n\n法庭：Greim先生，您是否快要结束了？\n\nGREIM先生：实际上是的。\n\n法庭：何不作个结束，然后我们进行上午中段休庭。\n\nGREIM先生询问：\n\n问：所以，Guo先生，你是否对William Je做过任何背景调查？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：但你是命令ACA向Strategic Vision（战略愿景）支付一百万美元的人，对吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：而且你曾把William Je介绍给亲密同事，称他是你的财务管家，不是吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：如果William Je是你的财务管家，而他又与CPPCC有关联，你不担心吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：Guo先生，你是否——\n\nGREIM先生：是的，我们就在这里结束。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。现在是11:44。我们休庭至中午。律师在休庭期间应重点考虑的一件事，是Greim先生就第五修正案援引的归责以及是否有善意基础质疑该援引所提出的问题。\n\n我对法律的理解是——我也向CLINE女士作此说明——如果对援引第五修正案提出质疑，确实应当逐个问题进行。并且，首先应由我决定，是否有充分基础质疑善意援引第五修正案。\n\n因此，Greim先生，如果你确实打算质疑该援引，你应当考虑是针对哪一个具体问题。\n\n好。休庭。\n\n（休庭）\n\n法庭：请坐。在我们开始之前——我希望这段话得到翻译。\n\n今天上午，我作出命令，对本程序进行转播和再传播，违反法院命令。\n\n请口译员进行口译，以便通过电话收听的人能够听到。\n\n该命令适用于在法庭内的人以及通过电话收听的人。\n\n我的命令已被违反。我确知此事，因为我听到了今天上午部分程序经由YouTube传播的内容。\n\n稍后，我会询问律师是否知悉此事。目前，我命令美国法警进行调查。如果此事确已发生且我们查明是谁所为，该行为可能构成且将构成民事藐视法庭，也可能构成刑事藐视法庭。\n\n今后任何对本程序进行转播或再传播的人，都将使其自身面临民事或刑事藐视法庭责任。\n\n为使记录明确，我已让一名中文口译员大声口译，以便通过电话收听的人能听到我以英语和中文所说的话。\n\nCLINE女士，你知道有关此事的任何情况吗？\n\nCLINE女士：我不知道，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：Greim先生，你知道有关此事的任何情况吗？\n\nGREIM先生：我不知道，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好。KLEIN先生，有人告知我你希望向法庭陈述。\n\nKLEIN先生：是的，法官阁下。我可以吗？\n\n法庭：可以。\n\nKLEIN先生：有人就我的当事人与CLINE女士，即Eastern的律师，会面一事向他提出了一些问题。自审判开始以来，他没有与CLINE女士会面，但我认为，对话进行方式或者至少他的陈述在记录中呈现的方式，存在一些混淆。\n\n记录应反映，自审判开始以来没有发生任何会面，但据我了解，先前有过会面。我已向我的当事人解释，尽管他与律师的讨论受特权保护，但他与律师会面的事实，或者他曾与律师讨论的事实，并不受特权保护。\n\n如果法庭或律师希望就审判前与CLINE女士发生的会面的事实进行询问，我想要——当然，只要法庭指示可以这样做，我们对此没有异议，他会回答那些问题。\n\n我只是想确保向法庭澄清这一点，并感谢法庭准许我作出说明。\n\n法庭：在我们再次开始询问之前，原告律师是否有任何希望向法庭提出的事项？\n\nCLINE女士：我就法庭关于援引归责和不利推论审查的要求咨询了律师。我的理解是有四项因素，如果法庭——我们愿意就其中两项作出约定。\n\n法庭：我会听取你的陈述，但你已经同意，你、Eastern Profit和该证人之间存在共同利益。不过，我会听取你就其他约定所作的陈述，然后我们将听取被告律师的陈述。\n\n克莱恩女士：是的，因此我的理解是，那是四项因素之一；我们愿意约定的第二项是非当事人证人在本诉讼中的作用。因此，我们愿意约定郭先生是本诉讼中的关键证人。\n\n法院：好的。格雷姆先生？\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，我认为我们已经非常接近证明另外两项。我可能还需要提出几个问题来进一步了解这一点。在接下来的询问中，我想把这些问题融入我的询问，以便同时完成几件事。\n\nL4MPEAS2 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n法院：您不妨提出这些问题；如果结果显示，存在您希望质疑援引该特权之主张是否出于善意的具体问题，我们可以在询问结束时处理这些问题。\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，还有一点。我们的理解是，质疑善意依据是第一点，也是我们确实需要在此处理的事情，因为届时我想，根据您的裁定，我们可能必须回去取得答复。\n\n但是，对我们认为应作出不利推定的陈述进行指定，或许不必现在立刻进行。\n\n法院：正确。而且，如果此前还不够清楚，我本应明确说明：我是否应作出不利推定、应就哪些问题作出不利推定，以及坦率地说，各项因素是否满足，都是我预计律师会在本案证据调查结束后进行辩论的事项。\n\n因此，各方均应确立其认为能够确立且需要确立的任何证据，然后我们将判定这一切意味着什么。\n\n格雷姆先生：我可以继续询问吗，法官阁下？\n\n法院：可以。\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：郭先生，在本次审判前，您与克莱恩女士会面过多少次？\n\n答：谁是克莱恩女士？\n\n问：坐在这里的乔安娜，乔安娜·克莱恩（Joanna Cline，乔安娜·克莱恩）。\n\n答：因此，我一次也没有与克莱恩女士当面会面过，但我们在线上见过两三次。\n\n问：您是否参与了决定是否在本诉讼中聘请克莱恩女士担任替代律师的决定？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：您知道是谁作出的决定吗？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：在本案于2019年12月进行的第二次证言记录之前，您是否曾与克莱恩女士或查夫先生（Mr. Chuff，查夫先生）会面？\n\n口译员：律师，您是说在2019年12月之前吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：是。\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：在那次证言记录的休息期间，您没有与克莱恩女士或查夫先生会面吗？\n\n答：您说的是2019年的第二次，对吗？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：您曾就他转达给克莱恩女士的信息与波德哈斯基先生（Mr. Podhaskie，波德哈斯基先生）商议过吗？\n\n答：我不知道那是否属于特权信息，因为那是律师与客户之间的事情。而且，由于我来自中国，我不知道何时或如何使用这类法律。什么受到保护，我不确定。\n\n法院：我认为您可以回答该问题。并没有要求您说明谈话内容。只是在问您谈话的主题。\n\n口译员：律师，您介意重复一下您的问题吗？我忘了。\n\n法院：请法庭书记员重复一下问题。\n\n（宣读记录）\n\n答：您是指乔安娜吗？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：是。\n\n问：郭先生，您在本案中作为当事人时有律师代理，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且那些律师在证据开示阶段继续代理您，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：那些律师是霍奇森·拉斯律师事务所（Hodgson Russ，霍奇森·拉斯律师事务所）的马克·哈蒙（Mark Harmon，马克·哈蒙）和艾琳·特斯克（Erin Teske，艾琳·特斯克），对吗？\n\n口译员：还有呢？\n\n格雷姆先生：艾琳·特斯克。\n\n答：问题是，我知道有两名律师，但如果您在说他们的名字，我确实不能确定这些名字。\n\n问：您是否记得您的——让我撤回这个问题。您是否记得，在证言记录休息期间，曾与您的律师以及东方利益（Eastern Profit，东方利益）的律师会面？\n\n答：什么东方利益的律师？我不知道什么东方利益的律师。我只与我的律师会面。\n\n问：您是否记得一名名叫扎卡里·格伦迪（Zachary Grendi，扎卡里·格伦迪）或扎克的东方利益律师？\n\n答：您看，我只与——您说的是乔安娜，对吗？问题是，我只见过乔安娜，但没有与她会面。我只与我的律师交谈。\n\n问：郭先生，乔安娜·克莱恩及其律师事务所是本案中东方利益的第四批律师，对吗？\n\n答：我不知道这件事。\n\n问：乔安娜·克莱恩之前的律师是扎克·格伦迪，不是吗？\n\n答：我记不清了。我确实不记得。\n\n问：顺便问一下，金泉（Golden Spring，金泉）的波德哈斯基先生在您的第一次证言记录中在场，对吗？\n\n答：似乎是这样，但我不能确定。\n\n问：而且您当然在休息期间与他商议过，不是吗？\n\n答：是哪一次休息？\n\n问：在您的证言记录中。\n\n答：我想是的，但我记不起来了，那是很久以前的事。\n\n问：您主张那些会面受到特权保护？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：郭先生，您是否在此援引特权，即第五修正案特权，以损害东方利益在本诉讼中的利益？\n\n口译员：是损害还是隐瞒，对不起？\n\n格雷姆先生：损害，损害。\n\n克莱因先生：法官阁下，郭先生是根据律师的建议援引该特权。\n\n法院：因此，我认为他可以回答该问题。我不认为该问题有任何不当之处。\n\n克莱因先生：好的。\n\n答：当然没有。\n\n问：因为您希望东方利益赢得本案，不是吗？\n\n答：当然是，我希望东方利益赢得本案。是否胜诉由法官决定。我只是作为证人在这里。\n\n法院：郭先生，您希望东方利益赢得本案吗？\n\n证人：非常希望。\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：郭先生，金泉纽约（Golden Spring New York，金泉纽约）是否正在支付您的律师克莱因先生——Klein，拼写为K——的费用？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：郭先生，本案中是谁支付东方利益律师的费用？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：郭先生，您曾与杰先生（Mr. Je，杰先生）谈过偿还所谓由ACA向东方利益提供的贷款；对吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：杰先生——您主张杰先生告诉您，他希望该贷款得到偿还，对吗？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：郭先生，您希望尽一切所能让东方利益赢得本案，不是吗？\n\n口译员：您介意让我重复一遍口译吗？\n\n答：我只是做我作为证人应当做的事。我不考虑其他事情。\n\n问：郭先生，您曾试图影响本案的结果，对吗？\n\n答：没有，我在这里只是因为我想证明我不是双重间谍。\n\n问：郭先生，您是否曾威胁本案中的其他证人？\n\n答：绝对没有。\n\n问：郭先生，您是否曾付钱让任何人站在法院外抗议？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：您是否曾付钱让任何人进入本法庭并在审判期间旁听？\n\n答：第五修正案。\n\n问：您是否曾威胁任何证人，说如果他们作证，您就会起诉他们？\n\n答：没有，绝不会。您看，我坐在这里的原因是因为——因为这是中国共产党（CCP，中国共产党）对我造成的威胁的结果。为什么我要对其他人做别的事情？\n\n问：先生，您不是根据传票来到这里的，对吗？\n\n答：“传票”是什么意思？\n\n问：您是否收到法院要求您出庭的命令？\n\n答：嗯，我想我一定收到了法院的通知，对吗？\n\n问：这是我向证人提出的问题。您知道吗？\n\n答：我想是。\n\n问：嗯，您是在本案中由东方利益传唤的，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：在您出庭前，您没有要求东方利益出具传票，对吗？\n\n答：嗯，我会告诉您，在中文里，对吧，传票如果被翻译成中文，叫作“传票”，那么我收到过一些通知。我确实收到通知，告诉我要到这里来，但那是否为传票，我不确定。我不知道。\n\n问：东方利益请您作为证人出庭时，您是否同意这样做？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：郭先生，自来到美国后，您主张自己“随时”都可以接触到中国共产党高层的通讯，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且，如果您收到此类信息，您当然会将其提供给美国联邦调查局（FBI，美国联邦调查局）或美国中央情报局（CIA，美国中央情报局），不是吗？\n\n克莱因先生：法官阁下，我们可以商议一下吗？\n\n法院：可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法院：您需要再听一遍问题吗？\n\n证人：（用英语）不，法官阁下。我有答案。\n\n口译员：不，法官阁下，我有答案。\n\n答：我们，我本人，向联邦调查局、美国司法部（DOJ，美国司法部）或中央情报局提供过一些信息，但可能不是全部。\n\n问：而我的问题是，当您收到此类信息时，您会将其提供给联邦调查局、中央情报局或司法部，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且您会将收到的全部信息提供给联邦调查局、中央情报局或司法部，不是吗？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：抱歉，您对我的问题回答“没有”，还是援引特权？\n\n答：我没有提供全部信息。\n\n问：在我坐在这里时，我可能听错了，但我以为我看见克莱因先生对——先生说了“不”。\n\n法院：不，不，不。我们不讨论克莱因先生与其客户之间的通信。如果您希望重新宣读答案，可以重新宣读答案，但您不能探究他们之间有何通信。\n\n问：郭先生，如您所说，您至少到2019年都曾有机会接收中国共产党高层的通讯，不是吗？\n\n答：我不能说我拥有全部信息，有一些。\n\n问：但在您于2019年8月进行证言记录时，您从未与联邦调查局或中央情报局会面以分享信息，对吗？\n\n口译员：证人要求您重复一下时间。\n\n问：2019年8月。\n\n答：我不——我不能确定我们在哪一个月会过面，或在哪一个月没有会过面。而且，联邦调查局和中央情报局要求我，每当我们会面时，我们不能实际上说我们见过面。\n\nL4MPEAS2 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n他们还告诉我，如果我说我见过他们，这实际上会对我在中国的家人不利。\n\n事实上，我坐在这里，我希望我不必回答这类问题，因为这对我在中国的家人、朋友非常不利。这是因为在中国，如果您与联邦调查局或中央情报局的合作关系有任何联系，实际上就是叛国、叛徒罪；因此可能被判处死刑。\n\n问：然而，您昨天自由地就此作证了，不是吗？\n\n答：嗯，实际上，即使昨天我也对此有所顾虑。我昨天想说这件事。只是，您知道，我不可能一直做正确的事、完美的事；所以这就是我今天想在这里提起这件事的原因。\n\n问：郭先生，我们将向您展示JX4中您的第一次证言记录，第152页第13至25行，以及第153页第3至7行。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n问：郭先生，那是您在2019年8月证言记录中的证词，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且那是真实的，对吗？\n\n答：嗯，那是因为中央情报局和联邦调查局要求我不应该那样说。嗯，一方面，因为证言记录，在我们完成证言记录后，全部程序都被上传至互联网。它可以\n\n2 被观看；因此，为了安全，我需要这么说。\n而且，我\n3 向 FBI 和 CIA 作出过承诺；所以我必须这么说。\n4 郭先生，您是否——由于证言笔录被上传至互联网，您在\n问：\n5 证言笔录中没有如实作答？\n6 KLEIN 律师：\n法官阁下，我可以商议一下吗？\n7 法庭：\n可以。\n8 （暂停）\n9 各位律师，我何不请你们彼此保持\n10 稍远一些的距离，彼此避开。\n11 KLEIN 律师：\n明白。\n12 （暂停）\n13 法庭：\nGreim 律师，在他们商议期间，您认为\n14 还需要多长时间？\n15 GREIM 律师：\n法官阁下，很抱歉，我认为我\n16 还需要一个小时。我还得审阅其他一些片段。\n17 法庭：\n由于现在是 12:58，我们将于\n18 1:55 重新开庭，这样 Klein 律师可以与其当事人\n19 在保持社交距离的情况下商议。我们将在 2:00 前不久见。\n20 请确保你们全都在 1:55 准备就绪。\n21 KLEIN 律师：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n22 （午餐休庭）\n\n首先，我想请口译员\n\n用中文口译，并以能够通过……听到的方式进行口译\n\n我想提醒本程序的每一位参与者，\n无论是在法庭内我面前的人员，还是通过电话收听的人员，\n一项重要事项：任何人进行再广播、转播或录制\n均属违法。\n我已就此发布了一项命令。\n任何违反者将受到处罚。\n我已命令法警\n调查那些正在转播和录制……的人员。\n\n原告代理律师是否有任何事项要向法庭提出\n\nGreim 律师，您有任何事项要向法庭提出吗？\n\n郭先生，提醒您，您仍在宣誓之下。\n是，法官阁下。\nGreim 律师，您可以询问。\n\n1 该特权。我只是向法庭说明。\n2 法庭：\n是否主张该特权由证人决定。\n3 该特权。\n4 证人：\n是，法官阁下。\n5 法庭：\n您对该问题的回答是什么？\n6 证人：\n好的。我主张我的特权。\n7 GREIM 律师：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n1 GUO WENGUI（郭文贵），\n2 继续交叉询问\n3 GREIM 律师询问：\n4 郭先生，您是否曾——首先，您在\n问：\n5 Sherry-Netherland Hotel（谢里-内德兰酒店）的公寓是您的公寓吗？\n6 答：\n我援引第五修正案。\n7 问：\n郭先生，您住在 Fifth Avenue（第五大道）吗？\n8 答：\n我援引第五修正案。\n9 问：\n好的。我不会问您拥有何物，或任何\n10 关于所有权的事。我只是问，您是否住在\n11 谢里-内德兰酒店的一套公寓里？\n12 答：\n是。\n13 问：\n您是否曾在该\n14 公寓内安装摄像头和麦克风？\n15 答：\n嗯，整栋酒店大楼都安装了。这是\n16 他们自己的设施。\n17 问：\n那么，您有能力在\n18 您的公寓内录制音频和视频，对吗？\n19 不。\n答：\n20 问：\n您从未有能力在\n21 您位于谢里-内德兰酒店的公寓内录制音频和\n22 视频吗？\n23 答：\n我不太明白您所说的“能力”是什么意思。那\n24 是什么意思？\n25 问：\n您是否能够进行视频和音频录制？\n答：\n嗯，这确实取决于是在何种情形下\n\n1 以及使用何种设备，所以我确实无法回答该\n2 问题。\n3 问：\nT&M Security（T&M Security 安保公司）在您的\n4 公寓内安装了麦克风和摄像头，不是吗？\n5 答：\n什么公司？\n6 问：\nT&M Security。\n7 答：\n这家公司在哪里？这家公司在哪里？\n8 问：\n这个问题——郭先生，我正在问您一个问题。我的\n9 问题是：\nT&M Security 是否是在您的公寓内安装\n10 摄像头和麦克风的公司？\n11 答：\n嗯，我不知道该公司的名称；但是，\n12 我确实知道，在这套公寓的真正所有人之前——在这套\n13 公寓的真正所有人之前，他们\n14 已经安装了麦克风和摄像头。我本人\n15 没有安装。\n16 问：\n您是否曾在您的\n17 公寓内制作音频和视频录制？\n18 答：\n您是指我本人吗？\n19 问：\n您是否自己或通过\n20 他人促成制作该等录制？\n21 答：\n我本人没有制作，也没有促成——我也没有要求\n22 其他人这么做。\n23 问：\n您是否偶然发现，对您公寓内会议已制作了录音，\n24 即视频和音频\n25 录制？\n口译员：\n对不起，律师，我——\n\n1 GREIM 律师：\n我换一种说法。\n2 GREIM 律师继续询问：\n3 问：\n您是否在某个时候发现，对您公寓内的会议已制作\n4 视频和音频录制？\n5 答：\n是。\n6 问：\n这些录制是否是关于您与 Liu\n7 Yanping（刘延平）会面的录制？\n8 答：\n是。\n9 问：\n而且，您实际上与《华尔街日报》的\n10 一些记者分享了这些视频和音频录制，不是吗？\n11 答：\n我实际上是在网上发现的，然后我与\n12 记者分享了它们。\n13 问：\n所以，您未在自己公寓内制作的视频和音频录制\n14 出现在网上；对吗？\n15 答：\n嗯，实际上是在最开始。刚开始时，\n16 它们出现在一些来自中共的 Twitter 上，或者\n17 中国的一些视频中。\n18 问：\n于是，您随后与《华尔街日报》的记者讨论了这些视频，\n19 并向他们展示了这些视频，对吗？\n20 答：\n我向他们展示了从网上下载的其中一部分，\n21 很小的一部分。\n22 GREIM 律师：\n请调出证物 34。\n23 问：\n我向您展示标记为证物 34 的材料。\n24 GREIM 律师：\n您能否进一步放大，以显示\n25 那张图片？\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\n1 我将请口译员向\n\n2 证人读出我即将读出的图片说明文字。\n3 “华商郭文贵，在其位于曼哈顿谢里-内德兰酒店的公寓内，\n4 他说，中国国家安全部官员曾在那里\n5 拜访过他。”\n6 随后是《华尔街日报》的图片来源署名。\n7 GREIM 律师询问：\n8 问：\n我的问题是：郭先生，您是否记得与该\n9 记者会面？\n10 答：\n是。\n11 问：\n这是否是您与该记者会面时的照片？\n12 记者？\n13 答：\n是。\n14 GREIM 律师：\n请看下一张图片。\n15 请稍微放大一点。这样已经是\n16 能达到的最佳效果了。好了。\n17 我再次读出图片说明文字，并且我\n18 将请译员进行口译。\n19 “郭先生展示了一段视频，他称该视频是他制作的，内容是\n20 中国国家安全官员到访\n21 其住所。”这是图片说明文字，然后该照片的来源署名为《华尔街\n22 日报》。\n23 证人：\n所以，您是说我向谁展示了一段视频\n24 ？\n\n1 GREIM 律师询问：\n2 问：\n郭先生，我是在读图片说明文字，并请\n3 口译员将其向您读出。这就是\n4 迄今发生的一切。\n5 郭先生，我的问题是：\n这是否是您向记者\n6 展示视频的照片？\n7 答：\n是，那是我从网上下载的视频。\n8 问：\n嗯，郭先生，图片说明文字称，您说您制作了这段\n9 关于该次到访的视频。您否认这一点吗？\n10 答：\n我现在不否认。这里我所展示的\n11 视频，是我从网上下载的，而该视频是在\n12 我的公寓内制作的。\n13 问：\n郭先生，该视频现在在哪里？\n14 答：\n我不知道。实际上，我从未看过完整的视频。\n15 问：\n郭先生，您收到过传票，不是吗，要求您提交您所拥有的\n16 关于与中国官员会面的每一份音频或视频\n17 录制？您记得吗？\n18 答：\n是。\n19 问：\n而您未就该传票提交任何材料，\n20 对吗？\n21 答：\n我相信我们已提交了一切。\n22 问：\n我想，我理解您没有保留该视频的副本，\n23 对吗？\n24 答：\n没有。\n25 问：\n不过，这是一次您想要\n\nL4MKEAS3 Guo - Cross 168\n\n公开的重要会议，不是吗？1\n\n答：嗯，我不想公开它，而且，事实上，我不知道有这样一段视频。那天，我们整天开了数小时的会，我不知道——为什么它会出现在互联网上，我不知道为什么中共实际上会有它，而且，即使到今天，我也没有看过完整的视频。这就是我所知道的一切。2 3 4 5 6 7\n\n问：郭先生，这是否是您称中国官员试图绑架您并将您带回中国的那次会议？答：嗯，您知道，那天我们开会开了很多小时。您所说的确实只是发生之事的一小部分。他们在那次会议期间多次提到，他们在美国拥有很多资源，他们有很多业务、很多组织以及很多企业，可以让我被绑架并让我被杀害，因此我需要与他们合作。在那次会议期间，他们让我签署了许多空白纸张和保证书，而且，我需要确保我的妻子和女儿在八月底返回中国。因此，那次会议期间发生了很多事。8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20\n\n问：嗯，郭先生，您现在否认他们实际上试图带您离开该大楼吗？21 22\n\n答：我不太明白您的意思。23\n\n问：郭先生，难道事实不是，在这次会议中，您的妻子为这些官员包了饺子。24 25\n\n1 答：\n是。\n2 问：\n然后您带领该团体走出大楼，对吗？\n3 答：\n是。\n4 问：\n现在，您昨天作证称，我们所称的——嗯，首先，\n5 一份我们称为\n6 视频 8 的文件的文字记录，是该会议一部分内容的准确记录，\n7 然后您同 Eastern Profit（东方收益公司）的律师一起逐页审阅了视频 8 的文字记录，\n8 即证物 114B，从第 1362 页开始。\n9 东方收益公司的律师。\n10 您记得吗？\n11 答：\n是。\n12 问：\n为了唤起您的记忆，我将至少调出\n13 第一页。这是一份相当长的文字记录。\n14 好了。\n15 如您所见，它从这里开始。它来自于\n16 您实际上曾在证言笔录中查看过的一个 YouTube 链接。\n17 您记得吗？\n18 答：\n是。\n19 问：\n在您的证言笔录中，您还查看了第二个片段，\n20 即视频 9，它也被转录。它从第\n21 1377 页开始。\n22 GREIM 律师：\nBecka，请转到那里。\n23 问：\n您记得吗？\n24 答：\n是。\n25 问：\n那么，郭先生，我将就视频 8 和视频 9\n\n1 向您提出几个问题，其文字记录\n2 从 SVUS 1377 开始。\n3 而且，郭先生，您将会看到，至少在这个片段中录制的\n4 开场发言\n5 来自刘延平，他以谈论\n6 第十九次全国代表大会开始谈话。\n7 您看到了吗？\n8 答：\n是。\n9 问：\n然后他说：“让我们把这件事办完。为什么\n10 会有那么多案件？再说，这不是什么大问题。我计算了\n11 您的资产。在您偿还债务后，您仍将剩下一些\n12 资产。”\n13 我读得对吗？\n14 口译员：\n律师，在哪里？我实际上\n15 没有——\n16 GREIM 律师：\n好的。让我退回去，更加\n17 仔细一些。\n18 GREIM 律师继续询问：\n19 问：\n那么，郭先生，您是否看到，在最左侧一栏中，\n20 有一个时间戳，告诉您记录员和口译员所引述的是视频的\n21 哪个部分？您看到了吗？\n22 答：\n是。\n23 问：\n下一栏是发言人？\n24 答：\n是。\n25 问：\n第三栏只是对用中文所说内容的文字记录，\n\n1 对吗？\n2 答：\n是。\n3 问：\n然后第四栏是英文翻译，\n\n4 对吗？\n5 答：\n是。\n6 问：\n昨天，您使用这份文字记录与东方收益公司的律师\n7 交谈，对吗？\n8 答：\n是。\n9 GREIM 律师：\n那么，我只请口译员\n10 将我所说的话从英文译为中文。\n11 问：\n那么，刘延平先生在第 30 秒时说：“您的资本和资产\n12 状况仍然很好。您的\n13 公司是私营企业之一。如此写来，说实话，\n14 在中国，他们这样做很少见。”\n15 您看到了吗？\n16 答：\n是，我看到了。\n17 问：\n然后您回答：“那太少了。您看，我的债务怎么可能\n18 只占我资产的 20%。”\n19 对吗？\n20 答：\n我不明白。您是在问我一个问题吗？\n21 问：\n是。我是在问您是否说过那句话。\n22 答：\n我援引第五修正案。\n23 GREIM 律师：\n现在，这名证人昨天曾根据该证物回答\n24 问题。我不明白——嗯，让我换一种说法。\n25 我认为我确实必须对该……提出异议。\n\nL4MKEAS3 郭文贵——交叉询问 168\n\n在此具有善意依据，因为否则，我们无法对该证物作任何其他处理。\n\n法院：克莱因先生，依据是什么？他确实回答了有关这份确切的记录文本和这次确切会面的提问。\n\n克莱因先生：法官阁下，我认为，他表示自己看到上面有他的姓名首字母。他被问到是否看到第一页上有他的名字；我想他说看到了。我认为最初被问的问题是，我想，是“你看到这个了吗”。我不反对他回答说他看到了，看到了上面有他的姓名首字母。该文件本身就是其所呈现的内容，不言自明，他当然可以确认他在文件上所看到的内容。\n\n我认为，如果今天询问他是否确认文件中记载的某些话是否确为其所说，我认为，若他不希望在法庭上作出该确认，他有权援引该权利；但我理解的是，当然，如果问他在文件上其姓名旁边是否出现了某些内容，他当然可以回答。\n\n法院：你们有昨天的证词记录吗？\n\n唐纳利女士（Donnelli）：有。\n\n格雷姆先生（Greim）：我们有。\n\n法院：如果有人能告诉我在哪一页，我就调出来。\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，似乎在第630页。\n\n法院：好的。我的法官助理正在帮我找。\n\n格雷姆先生：他似乎确实回答了，那些话是否有人对他说过。\n\n法院：请稍等一下。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法院：克莱因先生，在这份记录文本第629页，他被问到，这是否反映了Liu先生（刘先生）与证人之间的一次往来对话，这是否是他的理解。他对该问题回答“是”。因此，他并非只是承认上面有他的名字，而是说那是那次对话。\n\n然后在第630页，在向他读出该记录文本的一部分后，他被问到的问题是，他，即指Liu先生，是否对你说过那些话，他回答“是”。我看不出这怎么会是除选择性援引第五修正案权利及不允许的援引之外的任何情况；但你不妨向我解释，为什么他可以同意这段对话的一部分——实际上是全部——整个部分都是他进行过的对话，但Strategic（斯特拉泰吉克）的律师提问时，却拒绝回答问题。\n\n克莱因先生：法官阁下，我认为我们一直——我面前没有记录文本，我不清楚他被问到的具体部分是什么，但我相信——我能否——我不清楚——当有人被问及一份记录文本并说，您知道，我看到上面有我的名字，我并不否认我的名字在上面，或者这确实是我们之间的一次对话，然后回答一个问题，以表明记录文本反映有人说过某件事——也许我是过于吹毛求疵了——\n\n法院：不，我理解这一区别。\n\n克莱因先生：是。\n\n法院：我会让人把记录文本给你，但当问题是“他是否对你说过那些话”，仅此而已，他被问的不是“你是否看到文件上有你的名字”；他被问的是一个历史事实问题：他是否对你说过那些话。他由律师，即由你代理，他多次援引了权利；但对该问题及前一个问题，他没有援引。\n\n克莱因先生：对。\n\n法院：所以我会让人把记录文本给你，我会让你与你的当事人商议——\n\n克莱因先生：好的。\n\n法院：——但你将承担很重的责任，向我解释为什么存在善意援引。\n\n克莱因先生：明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：有人能把第629至630页给克莱因先生吗？\n\n（暂停）\n\n克莱因先生：我看了那几页，法官阁下。我理解——法官阁下是正确的，他是在回忆对话的一部分。那部分对话涉及完全不同的主题领域，涉及有关安全问题的提问或讨论。我认为他们现在询问的记录文本部分是另一部分——属于不同的主题领域，且是关于他的资产的问题。这是我们一直全面援引权利的问题。\n\n我理解法院所说，即这是他与某个特定人士之间的同一次对话，但它涉及许多主题，而我们是针对某些主题领域援引权利。即使就那些主题领域而言，我也不反对他确认其显然载于该页上，但该援引——我不认为是选择性的，因为我认为这是始终一贯地与我们一直援引权利的某些主题领域相联系。\n\n法院：让我了解你们援引权利的界限。\n\n对于有关他事实上是否说过记录文本所反映其说过的话的问题，他会援引吗？\n\n克莱因先生：我认为，就某些特定领域而言，意图是让他就那些特定领域全面援引权利。我担心开始试图过于细致地切分界限，也许我错了，法官阁下，但只要他开始回答有关那些主题领域的任何问题，我们现在就会转向一种情形，即可以提出论点称我们正逐渐趋于放弃权利，我认为避开这一点更为妥当。\n\n对于我们未援引权利的主题相关问题，我让他自由回答。我们并不否认该页所载即为其所载，但我认为我们有点——我理解法院所说，即文字显然在该页上，但从我的角度看，它就在该页上，确实在那里，没有人否认它在那里，而证人有我正寻求保护的某些宪法权利。\n\n法院：好的。\n\n格雷姆先生，我将这样处理：你仍须提出问题，证人将就其所援引的事项援引权利；如果在他的证词结束时你要求我处理，我将保留其证词，以处理是否存在对第五修正案权利的善意援引。如果不存在善意援引，我们将回来，他将回答你向他提出、而他曾援引权利的问题；如果存在，并且我认定存在善意援引，那么事情就到此为止。\n\n但这件事过于微妙，我无法在此当即作出裁决。克莱因先生是对的，就他说在存在侵犯宪法权利风险时必须谨慎行事而言。\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：现在，郭先生（Guo），昨天你就这次会面中讨论你家人的一小部分作了证，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：但是，你与Liu Yanping（刘延平）的大部分谈话都是关于你的资产，对吗？\n\n答：不。所以我需要——不，我需要在这里澄清一件事。您知道，在我们进行的那次谈话中，这里有一个用语，写的是“这样写”。我想向您指出它在哪里。\n\n所以，这里有一个用语，写的是“这样写”。也就是说，他按他的想法让我写了多封担保信。\n\n此外，我想告诉您，我们所看到的这份记录文本记录了音频，但问题是，在访谈期间，有很长一段时间他带我去了洗手间、去了电梯，并在那里谈话，那些谈话实际上没有被录音。\n\n问：郭先生，请翻到第1363页。如果您看到第3分30秒，您会看到Liu Yanping说：“它是在解决事情之后。在解决问题之后，我可以在这里向你保证，第一，先解决问题。第二，问题解决之后，如果你仍愿意为我们的国家作出贡献。”\n\n他是这样对你说的吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：然后你回答：“当然，如果条件允许我这样做，我非常愿意这样做”，不是吗？\n\n答：但我没有在中文中看到这一点。\n\n问：您必须翻到下一页。\n\n答：嗯，是的，我说过那句话，但问题是，也说了“如果条件允许”。我这里所说的条件，我一直坚持的是，中国共产党不等于中国。我所认可的中国、国家，是一个一人一票的中国，那才是中国——我的国家。\n\n法院：郭先生，我将指示你只回答所问的问题。当Eastern（伊斯特恩）的律师向你提问时，你将有机会澄清或补充任何你希望补充的内容。\n\n请继续，格雷姆先生。\n\n证人：（用英语）是，法官阁下。\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：现在，郭先生，到这个时候，你的全家人都已经回到纽约了，不是吗？\n\n答：您所说的全家人是什么意思？包括谁？\n\n问：好的。让我更具体一些。到这个时候，你的妻子、儿子和女儿都已回到纽约了，不是吗？\n\n答：不。我儿子不在这里。\n\n问：不过他不在中国，是吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：他在伦敦，不是吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：郭先生，请翻到第1387页。\n\n格雷姆先生：现在，我将朗读郭先生的一段长篇评论，因此我会将其分成两部分，每次我都会问郭先生他是否说过这些话。\n\n问：郭先生，你说过以下这些话，不是吗：“他说，但是文贵，不要走极端。他昨天试图劝我不要反对共产党和习近平。他要求我公开承认我不反对党。我说，我从未说过我反对党，也没有说过我爱党，但我希望今后能给我一个不反对党的理由。我希望有一天我可以关闭我的Twitter账户，回归正常生活，不再在视频中发声。在第十九次全国代表大会之前，我不会作任何决定。我想看看第十九次全国代表大会之后，孟建柱和王岐山是否还有任何职位。如果有，他们不可能放过我。我对此太了解了。”\n\n这是你对Liu Yanping说的话，不是吗，郭先生？\n\n口译员：所以，我读完了。\n\n证人：是。\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：这是你说的话，不是吗，郭先生？\n\n答：是我在重复某人给我打的电话，我实际上是在向某人重复他在电话里对我说的话，所以这就是为什么我在这里说“他说”。\n\n问：郭先生，这是你向Liu Yanping作出的陈述，不是吗？\n\n答：我是在向某人重复我们所说的——我对Liu Yanping所说的话。\n\n问：而且，郭先生，你在这里说你对其他人说过：“我从未说过我反对党，也没有说过我爱党”，对吗？\n\n答：但这与您刚才所说的很不一样。我说，我——他们要我公开承认我不反对中国共产党，所以我说，我现在没有说我反对中国共产党，但我也没有说我爱中国共产党。这就是这里所说的内容。\n\n问：而且，郭先生，你还说，如果孟建柱和王岐山在第十九次全国代表大会之后还有任何职位，他们不可能放过你。这是你说的，对吗？\n\n口译员：口译员作了更正。\n\n答：对。\n\n问：然后你继续说：“坦率地说，我不想浪费你们的时间。如果他们走了，这一代人上台，像你们这样的人仍然可以生存。我一定会宣布我不反对党、习近平主席、国家和民族。我会补充说，我不反对共产党。然后我会关闭我的Twitter账户，一切肯定都会好转。我会过正常生活。我对此感到高兴。”\n\n你说过这些话，不是吗？\n\n答：嗯，您看，事情是，我当时正在与另一个人通电话，所以这里才会提到：如果您在这里，而那些人已经不在这里，您——也就是正在电话中与我交谈的那个人——而他实际上是中国的一名高级官员。那么，如果他在这里，而那些人已经离开，我就愿意说我并不反对中国共产党。所以，我是在复述我与另一个人进行的一段谈话。\n\n（续下页）\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.（纽约南区法庭记录公司） (212) 805-0300\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问\n\n1 问：\n郭先生，您的担忧——您最终的担忧是，\n\n2 王岐山及其派系在第\n3 十九次全国代表大会后是否仍掌握权力，对吗？\n4 答：\n是，因为我在电话中说，那些人是独裁者，那些人\n5 是——\n6 所以他们不应当成为我们的领导人，而且他们也是\n7 腐败分子；所以他们不应当成为我们的领导人。\n8 问：\n那么，郭先生，您后来告诉刘延平（Liu Yanping），如果他\n9 想继续拘押您的儿子，他尽可以这么做，\n10 对吗？\n11 答：\n我没有在这里看到。\n12 问：\n抱歉。我们看第1388页。您看到顶部了吗？\n13 答：\n所以，这里我继续复述与电话中另一人的谈话，\n14 而那实际上是在说，当时是5月，我的女儿和妻子来到\n15 纽约。\n16 刘延平在5月把我的妻子和女儿带到纽约，\n17 他要求我写这封保证\n18 信，保证我的妻子和女儿将在\n19 8月27日返回中国，实际上是8月27日。否则，他们\n20 就要拘押我的儿子。所以我说，好吧，如果我的妻子\n21 和女儿想回中国，就让她们回\n22 中国。如果他们想拘押我的儿子，就让他们\n23 这么做。我不会妥协。\n24 问：\n郭先生，我们看第1394页。我想请您注意\n25 第31分30秒，您看到您说：“他们现在\n\nL4MPEAS4\n郭文贵—交叉询问\n\n1 说那种说法是错误的。如果我已经走入\n2 死胡同，我今天就不会还活着。我想\n3 诚实。今天，我与你见面。我们不要谈宏大\n4 理论，而只谈一些实际的事情。让我们\n5 开始办正事。”这是您告诉刘延平的话吗？\n6 答：\n我——我确实说过类似的话，但同样，那是在\n7 我先前所说内容的语境中。这是——我是在复述\n8 别人所说的话。\n9 问：\n不过，郭先生，您是在就您的资产与他谈条件，\n10 不是吗？\n11 答：\n我援引美国宪法第五修正案。\n12 问：\n好吧，郭先生——好。我们继续。我们看\n13 第1425页。在我们翻到那里时，我想先问您\n14 几个问题，以便澄清记录。刘延平是\n15 国家安全部副部长；对吗？\n16 答：\n他是副部长，也是——的书记\n17 口译员：\n该部？\n18 （停顿）\n19 答：\n他还是纪律\n20 委员会书记，也是政法\n21 委员会书记。\n22 问：\n在这次谈话的同时，与您通电话的是谁？\n23 答：\n是一名中国军队的将军，他已经被逮捕。\n24\n25\n\n1 问：\n他叫什么名字？\n2 答：\n您是在问他的名字吗？\n3 问：\n是。\n\n4 KLEIN 律师：\n法官阁下，我可以与他商议吗？\n5 法庭：\n可以。\n6 （停顿）\n7 Grimes 先生，还需要多久？\n8 GREIM 律师：\n法官阁下，我想我还需要半个\n9 小时。我将撤回这个问题，以便继续进行。\n10 法庭：\nKlein 先生，您商议完了。他\n11 已撤回该问题。\n12 KLEIN 律师：\n抱歉？\n13 法庭：\n您商议完了。该问题已经\n14 撤回。\n15 KLEIN 律师：\n好的。\n16 GREIM 律师询问：\n17 问：\n郭先生，现在在第1425页，我想请您注意该页中部的\n18 第1小时18分，您看到您——或者您是否告诉刘延平：\n19 “第一，我有王岐山同志及其家人持有大量\n20 非法取得的海航集团（HNA）股份、海外不动产以及\n21 他与女性存在不正当关系的证据。\n22 我将向\n23 党中央报告。”您说过这话，\n24 对吗？\n25 答：\n是。\n\nL4MPEAS4 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n1 问：\n我们往下跳过几行。您说：“第二，\n\n2 除了王岐山同志之外，我还有关于\n3 政治局中几个人以及前任常委会成员\n4 在海外持有大量资产和非法资金及银行\n5 存款的信息。”您对刘延平说过这话吗？\n6 答：\n是。\n7 问：\n接着您说：“他们还与女性存在不正当\n8 性关系，并有非婚生子女。我想\n9 本着支持习近平主席反腐败运动的精神，向\n10 中央委员会报告。如果习近平主席\n11 提拔他们进入常委会，我知道其中两人\n12 将一同进入常委会。那么习近平\n13 主席的生命可能会有危险。”您告诉刘\n14 延平这些话了吗？\n15 答：\n是。\n16 问：\n这是否就是数月后您要求 Strategic\n17 Vision（战略视野）寻找的同类信息？\n18 答：\n有关联。\n19 问：\n而且您想利用该信息赶走王岐山，\n20 对吗？\n21 答：\n不。\n22 问：\n您想将他的集团从中国共产党内部赶走，\n23 不是吗？\n24 答：\n不。\n25 问：\n我们调出——现在我们要转换话题，让我们\n\nL4MPEAS4 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n看视频一和视频四。我们先看视频四。为记录在案，让我们看看，先从 DX76A 开始。坦率说，您应当从这个开始。\n\nGREIM 律师：而且，法官阁下，这是 DX76A，即 Xiaoping Chen（陈小平）、Sam Chen（陈先生）于 January 17th, 2020 签署的一份声明。这是向本法庭提交的声明，用以证明两个不同的 YouTube 链接是 Mingjing（明镜），即 Mirror Media（明镜媒体），作为电视台在其日常业务过程中拍摄并保存的访谈的真实、准确录音。\n\n因此，这是他在该 August 31, 2017 访谈中确认的第一项，即第一个 YouTube 链接，而我们接下来将转到该访谈。因此，我想先提交这份声明，并申请将该声明本身作为证据接纳。\n\n法庭：我将暂予接纳，但不妨碍提出删除动议；不过，我接纳此项证据的证据依据是什么？\n\nGREIM 律师：嗯，法官阁下，这是保管人宣誓书——这是对我们即将向证人播放的视频进行认证的一种方式。18 19 20\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n（被告方证物 DX76A 获准作为证据接纳）\nGREIM 律师询问：问：好的。现在我们继续调出视频四。我们将播放一段视频，其文字记录载于 DX114B。不要 22 23 24 25\n\n1 立刻播放。文字记录从第1320页开始，\n\n2 即该视频四的 SBUS1320，载于证物114B。\n3 我不会——显然，这是一段31分钟的视频。\n4 郭先生，您在证言录取时曾看过这段视频，\n5 对吗？\n6 答：\n是。\n7 问：\n那我们就播放最初30秒。\n8 （播放视频）\n9 现在，我得找一个合适的位置停下。\n10 郭先生，您认得这是您写给刘延平书记的\n11 一封信的第一页吗？\n12 答：\n我必须向您澄清一件事。此类信件我曾多次签署，\n13 且有不同版本；此外，\n14 刚才播放的视频，此类视频在网上被反复传播的版本很多。\n15 所以我不知道这是否是真实版本，但无论如何，\n16 这封信，是我在接受 Mirror Media 采访期间\n17 主动提出的。\n18 问：\n所以您到 Mirror Media 是为讨论这封信；对吗？\n19 答：\n不，不是讨论这封信。而是因为他们\n20 要求——因为我的妻子和女儿，他们要求我的妻子和\n21 女儿在三个月内返回中国，而我不想让我的\n22 妻子和女儿返回。所以就有这封信，\n23 一封用以交换该条件的保证信。\n24 而且，我在 Mirror\n25 TV 展示这封信的前提也是，在那之前，有许多版本\n\nL4MPEAS4 郭文贵—交叉询问 168\n\n1 的类似信件在流传。\n\n2 但如果您清楚地、更仔细地看，那些信件\n3 的内容不同。每一页都不同。\n4 有的说这个，有的说那个。所以我到 Mirror Media，向\n5 他们展示，这就是那封信。\n6 问：\n所以，换句话说，您带到 Mirror Media 的\n7 信就是真实的信，对吗？\n8 答：\n嗯，我带到 Mirror Media 的信是真实的，\n9 但我不知道您现在展示的这一封，是否就是\n10 那一封。我告诉您，从3月、4月起，一直到\n11 8月27日，我总共被迫签署了五个不同版本的此类\n12 信件。\n13 法庭：\n郭先生，请限于回答\n14 所提出的问题。\n15 证人：\n（以英语）是，法官阁下。\n16 GREIM 律师：\n为了节省一点时间，\n17 我们不如调出——而不是逐一播放该视频\n18 版本——事实上，让我们转到\n19 第五分半钟。\n20 法庭：\n有该视频的文字记录吗，Greim 先生？\n21 GREIM 律师：\n有。这是证物114B。我们\n22 从第13:20页开始，现在我翻到第13:21页。\n23 GREIM 律师询问：\n24 问：\n那么，郭先生，我们将查看一份文字记录，您将在其中\n25 逐页讲解一封信。为节省时间，我们尽量不审阅您整个讨论过程，但我想从您开始逐页审视该信的最开始之处着手。所以我们转到第五分半钟。（播放视频）好的。我们得暂停，因为恐怕无法让它跳到特定位置。这是唯一的办法。恐怕我们必须回到第30秒。郭先生，该节目确实展示了该信的每一页，以便每个人都能查看。因此，我们只能回去播放。首先，郭先生，我们在这里暂停，看起来实际上是在约第30秒处。您认得右下角的签名是您的签名吗？答：是。问：那是日期，8-26 吗？答：是。问：我们看第二页。快进到那里即可。（播放视频）好的。这是第二页吗？答：是。问：这看起来是真实信件的第二页吗？1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n\n(212) 805-0300\n\n1 答：\n是。\n2 问：\n那是底部的您的签名，或者说右下角的\n3 您的签名吗？\n4 答：\n是。\n5 问：\n我们看第三页。\n6 （播放视频）\n7 郭先生，请审阅该页，并告知我们这是否\n8 看起来是该信的第三页。\n9 答：\n嗯，您看，这一页顶部与网上流传的某些\n10 版本很相似，所以我目前不太\n11 记得真实信件中的那几行。\n\n12 因此，我无法十分确定该第\n13 3页的真实性。\n14 问：\n好的。我们看第4页。您认得这一页吗？\n15 答：\n我相信是。\n16 问：\n好的。下一页。您认得这最后一页上的\n17 您的签名吗？\n18 答：\n这个签名，应当是我的。\n19 问：\n郭先生，为节省时间，我们没有播放，但在\n20 节目展示每一页时，您都谈到了该页并\n21 讨论了其内容，对吗？\n22 答：\n我们拍摄了大部分。\n23 问：\n而且，在这封信中，您要求习近平主席向您指派\n24 任务，不是吗？\n25 答：\n不，那不是我写的。这实际上是\n2 刘延平预先写好的。\n\n问：你的证词是，你没有在这封信中说过那样的话吗？\n\n答：嗯，我参加那个节目的全部原因就是要说明，这不是我写的一封信，而且这封信里的内容不是我的想法或我的意见。你看，问题在于它是预先写好的，因此我是在胁迫之下被要求签署这封信的。你也可以看到，这封信末尾写着，Guo Wengui（郭文贵）谨呈——谨致敬意。问题是，首先，我不可能打出那些字。我不会打字。而且，我当时已经在申请庇护；所以这正好是在十九大之际。他们要求我签署他们写好的这封信，以表示对Xi Jinping（习近平）的忠诚。\n\n问：我没有——那本来是一个“是”或“否”的问题。\n\nGREIM（格雷姆）律师：请核对口译员，您可以继续为记录发言，以便我们能够听到。\n\nYANG（杨）律师：我相信证人所说的是，庇护申请于9月9日提交——抱歉，9月6日。\n\n口译员：证人还说：我的庇护案件于9月6日提交。\n\nGREIM律师继续询问：\n\n问：郭先生，你在这封信中告诉习近平主席，你从未越过红线，不是吗？\n\nKLEIN（克莱因）律师：法官阁下，我可以与我的当事人商议吗？\n\n法庭：可以。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：郭先生，你需要重述这个问题吗？\n\n证人：您的意思是刚才那个问题吗？\n\n法庭：是。\n\n证人：（用英语）是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：请法庭记录员重读该问题。\n\n（记录重读）\n\n答：不，因为这不是我写的。\n\n问：好的。让我重新措辞这个问题。在你签署的信的第三页，信中写道：“我没有越过红线”，对吗？\n\n答：那些不是我写的。\n\n法庭：郭先生，让我问你一个问题。你是否签署了一封致习近平主席的信，其中写道“我没有越过红线”？\n\n证人：是，我确实签署了这样一封信。\n\nGREIM律师继续询问：\n\n问：而且，郭先生，“红线”是指你没有发布视频并泄露国家情报网络，对吗？\n\n答：不，那不是我的意思，而且那根本不是我的意思。这些话没有一句是我写的。\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - 交叉询问 168\n\n问：但是，郭先生，你向主持人确切解释了那是什么意思，不是吗？\n\n答：所以你看，问题在于，我恰恰是在向主持人解释相反的意思。你看，我——这是Liu Yanping（刘彦平）准备的信。我不可能给习近平写一封信。\n\n我向该节目主持人解释，我是被迫签署这封信的，而且我——我的想法与这封信所声称的内容完全相反。你看，我被迫签署这封信，因为他们想让我的妻子和女儿在三个月后返回中国，而且，当时我已经申请了庇护。在中国，如果我在申请庇护后回去，我会被判处死刑。\n\n问：好的。那么，郭先生，你的证词是，如果我们通看这整个视频，我们必须在其中找到你告诉Chen（陈）先生你是在胁迫之下签署这封信的地方？你对此本应非常明确，对吗？\n\n口译员：律师，我不确定我是否理解。您说是在它被称作的地方并找到那个地方？我没有听清。\n\n问：郭先生，我们应当能够通看这整个视频，并且应当能够在其中某处看到你告诉陈先生，你是在胁迫之下签署这封信的，对吗？\n\n答：但我不记得了。\n\n问：所以，在这次访谈中，你绝不会赞扬习近平主席并说你想要有机会为习近平主席效力，是吗？\n\n答：嗯，不一定，因为我可能会这么说只是为了寻求保护我的家人，而且，当时我正在寻求政治庇护。我知道自己处于极大的危险之中。\n\n问：现在，你直到9月才实际申请政治庇护。你几分钟前曾如此作证，不是吗？\n\n答：是在我念完这封信数日之后。我看到了这封信，然后我申请了庇护。\n\n问：而且，由于你是在胁迫之下签署此信，并且你受到如此严重的胁迫，你当然会出示这封信——你会将这封信附入你的庇护申请，对吗？\n\n答：不一定，因为我有很多文件。所以它可能没有被附入。\n\n问：这也许不重要到需要告诉美国政府？\n\n答：嗯，问题在于，我向移民律师提供了许多文件；因此，哪些文件应当提交给政府，是由律师决定的。\n\n问：包括Lianchao Han（韩连潮），对吗？\n\n答：我不太明白你所说的包括韩连潮是什么意思。\n\n问：我们继续吧。郭先生，当你——你作证说，你于2017年初首次永久居住在美国；对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：我将为你播放一段视频。该视频被转录在DX114B中。这是视频一，文字记录从第13:14页至第13:15页。郭先生，我希望你仔细听。然后我会就此问你几个问题。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n现在，为便于记录，视频上正在播放一份文字记录，因为它来自YouTube。然而，被告方的文字记录是由同一人——由Jessica Chu（杰茜卡·朱）完成的，她转录了全部内容。那就是114B第13:14页至第13:15页的内容。\n\n郭先生，我要问你的第一个问题是：那是你的声音吗？\n\n答：我确实无法确认那是否是我的声音，因为互联网上有很多仿造和复制我的声音的内容。\n\n问：嗯，那个视频里有一些非常强烈的陈述，你同意吗？\n\n答：所以我可以百分之百告诉你，那里所说的全是捏造的。它们全都不是真的，甚至在最后，他说乘以三、乘以十。如果那是真的，那么他们为什么不能大声说出来？所以全都是捏造的。\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - 交叉询问，第168页\n\n问：郭先生，你能否在记录中、在宣誓后向我们否认，那段录音中的声音是你的？\n\n答：嗯，首先，那是否是我的声音，是否确实是我的声音，是一个问题。另一件事是，它可能是我真实的声音；但是，他们可能只是把我声音中的不同词语拼接起来，并剪辑成这个视频。\n\n问：好的。让我换一个——\n\n法庭：郭先生，视频中那是你的声音吗？\n\n证人：嗯，我很难辨认，因为网上流传着很多那样制作的东西。我无法辨认那是否是我的声音。\n\nGREIM律师继续询问：\n\n问：郭先生，你曾多次在网上攻击一个名叫Xi Nuo（希诺）的人，对吗？\n\n答：嗯，我不太明白你所说的攻击是什么意思。实际上，我才是受到这个希诺之人攻击最多的人。但是你说攻击时，我不知道你在说什么。你是什么意思？\n\n问：你给这个人Xi Nuo起了一个绰号吗？\n\n答：但那不是我给他起的绰号。他的名字就是Xi Nuo。\n\n问：所以你就是这样称呼他的？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你是否曾称他为“Shit Nuo”？\n\n答：我只是沿用网上其他人对他的称呼，但他也那样称呼我——我不在这里说那个。\n\n问：好的。可以说你与此人有一场长期争执吗？\n\n答：他一直——他一直在威胁我。从2015年开始，到现在已有四年、五年。他一直在网上谈论这件事，说要杀掉我，要把我抓回中国。他一直这样说。\n\n问：郭先生，你昨天作证说，你做过数千个网络视频，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你的主要活动之一难道不是攻击在美国的其他中国人吗？\n\n答：但我从未对任何中国人发起过攻击。一直都是他们攻击我，然后我才反击。\n\n问：你在网上攻击过许多中国异见人士，不是吗？\n\n答：嗯，我攻击的人、攻击我的人，以及我予以反击的人，这两组人数之间的比例非常、非常不同。\n\n问：郭先生，你还利用Guo Media（郭媒体）攻击在美国的中国人？\n\n答：我从未攻击过。我一直都是在反击。\n\n问：你拥有郭媒体吗？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：你知道谁拥有它吗？\n\n答：我援引第五修正案。\n\n问：你在网上攻击过Bob Fu（傅希秋）吗？\n\n答：我从未对任何人——我从未对任何人发起攻击，只有在受到攻击时，为了自然保护我才会反击。而且，网上有数百万人、或多达一百万人攻击我，我写——我也不可能对他们每一个人都反击。因此，这确实是中国共产党的战略，即无限制战争；它包含在政府的所有报告中。\n\n问：郭先生，你是否曾鼓励你的追随者在Bob Fu家中骚扰他？\n\n答：不可能。\n\n问：你是否曾鼓励你的追随者骚扰Sasha Gong（龚小夏）？\n\n答：绝对不可能。\n\n问：你是否曾指控龚小夏是一名共产主义间谍？\n\n答：是在她称我是间谍之后，我才反击。\n\n问：Bob Fu怎么样，他是一名牧师，不是吗？\n\n答：绝对不是牧师。他是共产党员。\n\nL4MPEAS4 Kwok - 交叉询问\n\n问：郭先生，自我们看到的2017年4月那段录音以来，你的大部分活动难道不是攻击这个国家的异见人士吗？\n\n答：纯属谎言。所以这完全是谎言，因为如你所见，自4月19日起，我99%的活动都是从事反共产党活动，揭露他们在香港、新疆和西藏所做的事情。我在揭露有关病毒的真相。我不会有时间从事任何攻击异见人士或海外异见人士的活动。\n\n问：郭先生，在我们刚才听到的那段录音中，你说你想在立功之后回中国，对吗？\n\n答：我不记得了。\n\n问：而且，郭先生，你想要取得研究证据，以便铲除中国共产党的Wang Qishan（王岐山）派系，对吗？\n\n答：不。\n\n问：而且，你想这样做，以便能够返回中国并恢复你过去的生活方式；对吗？\n\n答：绝对不可能。如果是那样，中国共产党就不会威胁或逮捕我的家人。所以，只要中国共产党和习近平仍然存在，我就不可能返回中国。\n\n问：而且，你从未停止与MSS（国家安全部）合作，对吗，先生？\n\n答：我确实不知道你在说什么。这完全是无稽之谈。\n\nGREIM律师：我没有更多问题。\n\n法庭：好的。我们下午休庭十分钟。Cline（克莱因）律师，你预计复询需要多长时间？\n\nCLINE律师：大概15分钟。\n\n法庭：好的。然后我们将转至最后一名证人。请把讲台擦干净。现在休庭。\n\n（休庭）\n\nL4MKEAS5\n\n法庭：在我们再次开始听取证词之前，我有一项警告，希望中文口译员用中文大声复述。\n\n我已发布命令，禁止对本程序进行任何转播或录音。任何违反该命令的人，都将使其自身面临因民事或刑事藐视法庭而受到处罚的风险。\n\n谢谢。\n\nGreim律师，你站起来了。你有事要向法庭提出吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：是的。在结束前，我想简要说一下，我想我最好现在就做。我未能申请将被告方证据DX 114，即视频9、译文以及视频1和4的译文；DX 37，实际上是视频1和4；以及DX 35，即该信函的译文，作为证据接纳。我理解Eastern Profit（东方利润）的代理律师保留所有异议，包括对真实性的异议。\n\n法庭：好的。这些证据将予以接纳，但以可能提出剔除动议为限。\n\n（被告方证据35、37和114作为证据接纳）\n\n法庭：格雷姆先生，关于援引第五修正案权利，您是否保留任何问题，还是我们已经超过了这个问题？\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，我们不会就异议的善意性质提出任何问题。我认为，我们可能会希望就其中某些问题主张作出不利推定。\n\n法庭：很好。克莱恩女士，您可以询问。\n\n复询问\n\n克莱恩女士询问：\n\n问：郭文贵先生，格雷姆先生问了您一些关于您据称于2017年发表支持中国共产党的言论的问题。事实上，您是否在2017年和2018年公开发声反对中国共产党？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：是否有您言论的视频发布在社交媒体上？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：我想向您展示一组视频片段汇编，载于我们标记为原告方证据52的证据中。在今天作证之前，您是否有机会预先审阅该视频汇编？\n\n答：是，我审阅了。\n\n问：该汇编是否包含2017年和2018年实际发布在社交媒体上的视频的准确节选？\n\n答：是。\n\n克莱恩女士：请播放PX 52。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n克莱恩女士：现在请看PX 53。\n\n法庭：您是否提交PX 52作为证据？\n\n克莱恩女士：法官阁下，如果可以的话，我正准备将其与53一并关联起来？\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n克莱恩女士询问：\n\n问：郭先生，关于PX 53，该证据53中的YouTube链接是否反映了片段中所示完整视频实际发布的地点？\n\n答：是。\n\n克莱恩女士：法官阁下，原告提交PX 52和53作为证据。\n\n格雷姆先生：无异议，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。接纳。\n\n（原告方证据52和53作为证据接纳）\n\n克莱恩女士询问：\n\n问：郭先生，我还有一段较短的视频要播放。这是关于您的视频。它是一段单独的视频，但节选自您于2018年7月制作的一段视频，载于我们称为证据70A的证据中。您是否有机会在今天作证前审阅该视频？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：除为便于在法庭播放而进行了缩短外，它是否准确反映了一段发布在YouTube上的视频？\n\n答：是。我的回答是是。\n\n克莱恩女士：请播放证据70A。\n\n（播放视频）\n\n克莱恩女士：法官阁下，原告提交原告方证据70A。\n\n法庭：该证据予以接纳，但以可能提出剔除动议为限。\n\n（原告方证据70A作为证据接纳）\n\n克莱恩女士询问：\n\n问：郭先生，您如何看待这样一种暗示：您实际上是伪装成异见人士的中国共产党支持者？\n\n答：嗯，如果我确实是中国共产党的支持者，那么在美国登记的间谍Elliott Broidy（艾略特·布罗迪）和Bruno Wu（吴征）就不需要花那么多钱，然后游说一位总统，或者游说司法部的Higginbotham（希金博瑟姆），把我送回中国。\n\n克莱恩女士：没有进一步问题。\n\n法庭：还有其他事项吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。郭先生，您可以离席了。\n\n证人：那么我不需要再说什么了吗？\n\n法庭：不需要。\n\n谢谢您，Klein（克莱因）先生。\n\n克莱因先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n证人：谢谢您，法官阁下。谢谢各位。\n\n（证人离席）\n\n法庭：下一位证人？\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，我认为下一位证人是Strategic Vision（战略愿景）将要传唤的唯一一位证人——我知道下一位证人是Strategic Vision将要传唤的唯一一位证人。我们为她作了特别安排，因此他们正在将她带进来。\n\n法庭：很好。格雷姆先生，为便于安排，您对她的直接询问将持续多长时间？\n\n格雷姆先生：我可以告诉您，我已大幅删减，因此我认为可能约为30分钟。这是我的目标。应当几乎没有证据，甚至没有证据。\n\n法庭：我们今天要完成她的询问。\n\n法庭：而且，格雷姆先生，这将是最后一位证人；对吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：克莱恩女士，我想您没有其他证人了？\n\n克莱恩女士：正确。\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，我在休庭期间与克莱恩女士讨论了一件事。我想知道我们是否可以利用这段空闲时间处理有关8:00截止期限的问题？\n\n法庭：当然。\n\n格雷姆先生：我们想知道法庭是否可以将今晚8:00的截止期限延长至明天某个时间？\n\n法庭：可以。您建议明天什么时间？你们两位谈过吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：实际上，明天可能需要稍晚一些，因为我们将在前往Missouri（密苏里州）的飞机上。也许——\n\n法庭：您想定在明天8:00吗？这对您可行吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：那太好了。\n\n法庭：这对原告可行吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：可以。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：证人进入法庭了吗？\n\n证人：是的。\n\n法庭：女士，请上前。\n\n证人：好的。\n\n法庭：您将在陪审团席就座。我们将其用作证人席。\n\n证人：谢谢。\n\n法庭：您要戴着口罩；您将坐在那里。请戴着口罩。\n\n证人：请问：我需要戴双层口罩，还是只戴一个？\n\n法庭：是KN95吗？\n\n证人：不是。\n\n法庭：我认为您需要两个口罩都戴上。\n\n证人：好的。谢谢。\n\n克莱恩女士：法官阁下，对不起，我可以更正一下我所说的话吗？我只是想提醒法庭，我们仍有王女士证言这一尚未解决的问题。\n\n法庭：是的，没错。我忘了这一点。\n\n法庭：格雷姆先生，我认为，为了记录在案，您应当正式说明您将传唤的证人姓名，然后传唤该证人，之后我们将为她宣誓。\n\n格雷姆先生：法官阁下，被告传唤Sasha Gong（龚莎莎），G-o-n-g。\n\n法庭：下午好，龚女士。\n\n法庭：Matt（马特），请为证人宣誓。\n\n证人：下午好。\n\nSASHA GONG，\n\n由被告传唤作为证人，\n\n经正式宣誓后，作如下证言：\n\n证人：Sasha Gong，Dr. Sasha Gong，姓氏为G-o-n-g，名字为S-a-s-h-a。\n\n法庭：格雷姆先生，您可以询问。\n\n直接询问\n\n格雷姆先生询问：\n\n问：龚女士，您的职业是什么？\n\n答：我是一名记者、学者和作家，现在是一名电影制片人。\n\n问：您从事记者工作多久了？\n\n答：二十五年。\n\n问：您说您是一名学者。您担任学者多久了？\n\n答：数十年。\n\n问：您认识郭文贵吗？\n\n答：认识。\n\n问：您如何认识他？\n\n答：我于4月17日采访了他——2017年4月17日。\n\n问：并且在正式采访之前，您也对他进行过一次采访，对吗？\n\n答：17日是正式采访，持续约一天半，我于2017年4月19日在电视上正式采访了他。\n\n问：我们稍后会谈到这个问题。我们稍后会详细讨论。\n\n问：您是否还曾作为中间人，将郭先生介绍给其他人？\n\n答：是的，介绍给其他记者。\n\n问：您后来是否加入了由郭先生推广的某个实体的董事会？\n\n答：是的，我加入了。\n\n问：那是什么实体？\n\n答：Rule of Law Society（法治协会）。\n\n问：在2017年春季您对美国之音的采访后，您是否成为郭先生的熟人？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：我们稍微谈谈您的背景，在这里我们只花几分钟。您出生在哪里？\n\n答：中国北京。\n\n问：何时？\n\n答：1956年。\n\n问：作为在中国长大的青年，您与政府的关系如何？\n\n答：我的家庭曾遭受迫害。事实上，我是第四代美国人。我有两位曾祖父作为铁路工人来到这个国家，后来他们被送回美国。我的祖父也曾是美国公民，回到中国后，被指控为美国特工，在监狱里待了20年——20年。\n\n问：龚女士，您本人是否曾被监禁？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：何时？\n\n答：1977年至1978年。\n\n问：因为什么？\n\n答：因发表反政府言论。\n\n龚—直接询问\n\n问：您在中国是否接受过高等教育？\n\n答：在中国，这有点难以解释。在1962年至1965年之前，我接受过三年教育，我的家庭遇到了政治麻烦。我们被送到农村。我作为农民、农业劳工工作，后来我作为工人、工厂工人工作。\n\n问：龚博士，我想快进并集中讨论。您是否在中国上过大学？\n\n答：是。我在——我出狱后参加了一场考试。政治形势发生变化，我参加了考试，并进入了中国最顶尖的大学。我在那里获得了两个学位，一个硕士学位和一个文学学士学位。\n\n问：您是否在某个时候移民到美国？\n\n答：是。1987年。我最初作为访问学者来到这里，后来进入Harvard University（哈佛大学）的博士项目。\n\n问：您最终是否在哈佛获得博士学位？\n\n答：是。我于1995年获得博士学位。\n\n问：什么专业？\n\n答：社会学。\n\n问：您后来是否成为美国公民？\n\n答：是。2001年3月29日。那天，我很幸运。我与总统Bush（布什总统）及电视记者一起参加了一场大型晚宴。我得到了布什总统的亲自祝贺，这在C-SPAN上可以看到。\n\n问：龚博士，在哈佛毕业后，您能否非常简要地介绍一下您的职业经历？\n\n答：可以。我在UCLA（加州大学洛杉矶分校）任教几年，之后我接受了一份工作。我进入新闻业，在Radio Free Asia（自由亚洲电台）接受了一份工作。之后，我实际上作为——为AFL-CIO（美国劳工联合会—产业工会联合会）担任中国问题专家工作，并且在AFL-CIO工作几年后不久，我休了一段时间假，并为Hillary Clinton（希拉里·克林顿）的总统竞选活动助选。之后，我加入美国之音，担任其中国部主任。\n\n问：美国之音的使命是什么？\n\n答：美国之音是一个于1942年设立的联邦机构，旨在促进世界各地的真相、新闻、自由和民主。\n\n问：您现在仍在那里工作吗？\n\n答：不。我被解雇了。\n\n问：为什么？\n\n答：因为我对郭先生进行了现场直播采访，而该采访被美国之音中断。他们认为我不应当进行那次采访，因此他们认为那是不服从命令。而且，该采访已获我的上级批准。\n\n问：龚博士，您是否仍在与美国之音进行诉讼？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：那么，除了您的——嗯，您不再在那里了。您今天在职业上从事什么工作？\n\n答：我在制作电影。我正在制作——我正在完成一部电影，\n\n龚—直接询问\n\n该电影共五集，讲述了近五小时的异见人士故事\n\n2 在共产主义统治下的运动。\n\n3 因此，我采访过莱赫·瓦文萨（Lech Walesa）、兰茨贝尔吉斯（Landsbergis，他是自由的立陶宛的首任总统）以及其他运动的创始人。\n\n5 问：龚博士（Dr. Gong），您是否参与任何与中国有关的政策组织？\n\n7 答：是。我是“当前危险——中国委员会”（Committee for Present Danger — China）的创始成员，该委员会是一个主要设在华盛顿的政策组织。\n\n10 问：抱歉，是一个党派组织吗？\n\n11 答：不，是一个政策组织。\n\n12 问：哦，政策组织？\n\n13 答：政策组织。\n\n14 问：该组织的目标是什么？\n\n15 答：警告美利坚合众国（United States of America）注意中国、共产主义中国干预我们的——嗯，经济、政治以及各个领域所带来的危险。\n\n18 问：龚博士，自您移民并成为美国公民以来，您是否一直与美国境内的异议人士保持联系？\n\n20 答：哦，是的，很多。尽管我必须说，我较少参加——我几乎不参加异议运动的活动，因为作为一名记者，我会保持一点距离，但我认识大多数人。他们认识我。\n\n24 问：您认识陈光诚（Chen Guangcheng）吗？\n\n25 答：他是一位非常亲爱的朋友。\n\n1 问：他是一名异议人士吗？\n\n2 答：是。人们称他为盲人律师。\n\n3 他多年来帮助人们反对独生子女政策和强制堕胎政策，并且曾不止一次被监禁数年，他们还折磨过他。后来，\n\n6 他逃到美国，《时代》杂志（Time Magazine）把他登上了封面。\n\n8 问：那傅希秋（Bob Fu）呢，您认识他吗？\n\n9 答：傅希秋也是一位好朋友。傅希秋作为一名基督徒逃离了\n\n10 中国，他在美国成为一名牧师，也获得了博士学位，并创办了一个\n\n12 名为“中国援助”（China Aid）的组织，该组织帮助基督徒逃离\n\n13 独裁统治。\n\n14 问：龚博士，异议人士刚到美国时，您是否做过任何事情帮助他们？\n\n16 答：哦，很多。\n\n17 问：您做什么？\n\n18 答：嗯，除了帮助他们在媒体上讲述自己的故事，以及帮助——嗯，开车、翻译、帮助他们申请大学，或者诸如此类的事情，各种各样的事。\n\n21 问：您是否观察到，许多异议人士一旦来到这里，都会彼此保持联系？\n\n23 答：是。\n\n24 问：数十年来，您是否观察到，在\n\n1 美国是否存在所谓异议人士——华人异议人士社群这样的事物？\n\n2 答：是。\n\n3 问：在您的工作领域中，您是否继续密切关注\n\n4 中国发生的事件？\n\n5 答：是，非常密切。\n\n6 问：现在让我问您一下与中国的通信问题。\n\n8 您是否仍通过电子方式，\n\n9 通过电子邮件或电话，与中国大陆的任何人保持通信？\n\n11 答：我尽量少这样做，因为——尽量少。\n\n13 问：为什么？\n\n14 答：因为中国政府监控一切。这是\n\n15 发生的事情：当——\n\n16 问：龚博士，我只是想——随着我们进入更多细节，我们尽量采用更多\n\n17 问答形式——\n\n18 答：当然。\n\n19 ——可以吗？问：\n\n20 答：当然。\n\n21 问：顺便问一下，中国的国家代码是多少？\n\n22 答：86。\n\n23 问：再问您一下带有 qq.com 的电子邮件地址。\n\n24 您熟悉这个吗？\n\n25 答：非常熟悉。\n\n1 问：那是某个特定的电子邮件服务提供商吗？\n\n2 答：QQ 由腾讯（Tencent）所有，腾讯是中国最大的电信\n\n3 公司，已经达到垄断地位。\n\n4 腾讯是这家公司，您知道，完全受\n\n5 中国政府控制，那里驻有许多中国网络警察。\n\n6 这不是我的想象，这是中国媒体\n\n7 自豪地宣布他们已下令在该处驻有网络警察。\n\n8 问：龚博士，您是否认识中国境内任何敢于使用公开电话线路和 QQ 电子邮件地址，\n\n9 为真正的异议人士管理网页的人？\n\n11 答：不认识，除非他们想自杀。\n\n12 问：好的。我们继续。\n\n13 龚博士，在您的工作领域中，您是否必须对居住在美国的哪些中国人是可靠的异议人士、哪些人对北京具有某种程度的忠诚，\n\n14 作出您自己的个人判断？\n\n17 答：是。\n\n18 问：好的。为什么？\n\n19 答：异议人士通常——所有异议人士都有经历记录。\n\n20 这种经历记录是指你在中国做过什么，\n\n21 使你成为中国的异议人士。你不可能突然\n\n22 在没有任何经历记录、没有任何事件之类事情的情况下成为异议人士。\n\n23 我可以很快作出判断，您知道，中国——我总是\n\n24 开玩笑说，中国就像一个小国家，人人都认识\n\n25 彼此；如果你从某所学校毕业，比如哪所学校，\n\nL4MKEAS5 龚——直接询问\n\n而且你有校友，人们可以为你担保，并且你\n\n做过一些事情。大多数在美国获得帮助的异议人士；他们在中国境内做过很多事情。因此我会问，是哪个县、哪个城市、你做过什么？我们有记录，媒体报道、他人报告、法院案件。追查起来并不那么困难。\n\n问：龚博士——\n\n法院：克莱恩女士（Ms. Cline）？\n\n克莱恩女士：法官阁下，提出异议。就我所理解，部分回答基于个人知情，部分听起来像是关于何为异议人士的专家证言，我们提出异议；龚女士未被作为专家证人提出。\n\n法院：是的，我将接纳该证言，但不妨碍提出删除动议。\n\n我不知道你们在涉及专家证言这一方面还有多少内容。\n\n格赖姆先生（Mr. Greim）：不，我们并未将她作为专家证人提出。我们没有提出任何专家证人。我们提出——在她具有非专家意见的范围内，该意见旨在基于她的个人经历，而非任何特殊方法或专业知识。\n\n法院：我认为，如果提出删除动议，这将是问题所在。\n\n由格赖姆先生提问：\n\n问：龚博士，您何时第一次得知郭文贵（Guo Wengui）？\n\n答：2017年2月。\n\n1 问：其间有一系列互动。他是否前来\n\n2 请求美国之音（Voice of America，VOA）进行采访？\n\n3 答：是。我的资深记者来到我这里，请求我\n\n4 批准采访郭文贵。\n\n5 问：那么，您最终是否批准了？\n\n6 答：我告诉他，我需要做一些研究，我花了几周时间\n\n7 研究后，给了他批准。\n\n8 问：那么，郭先生对这次采访是否有任何要求？\n\n9 答：是。郭先生回复资深记者说，\n\n10 他希望由我亲自采访他。\n\n11 问：那么，您为这次采访做了什么准备？\n\n12 答：我花了数天阅读新闻报道和各种\n\n13 报告，听取他先前的采访，并四处打听。\n\n14 所以，在我前往采访他之前，我认为我已经了解了情况。\n\n16 问：您随后是否先对郭先生进行了不公开采访？\n\n17 答：是。我向他提出前提条件：如果他希望参加我的\n\n18 直播采访，我必须事先对他进行长时间采访。\n\n19 问：那持续了多久？\n\n20 答：我相信，总共在16至18小时之间。\n\n21 问：您在哪里进行的？\n\n22 答：在郭的公寓里。\n\n23 问：在哪里？\n\n24 答：雪莉-荷兰酒店（Sherry-Netherland Hotel）。\n\n25 问：您在那里见到了王雁（Yvette Wang）吗？\n\n1 答：是。\n\n2 问：郭——或者说，郭是如何介绍她的？\n\n3 答：郭介绍她是他的助理。\n\n4 问：您在那里见到了韩春光（Chunguang Han）吗？\n\n5 答：是。\n\n6 问：郭如何介绍他？\n\n7 答：他把他介绍为自己的厨师。\n\n8 问：您看见他做饭了吗？\n\n9 答：是，他给我们做了一些面条。\n\n10 问：郭是否用任何昵称称呼韩春光？\n\n11 答：不是昵称；那是中国人称呼年轻人的方式，即“小韩”。\n\n13 问：该采访——该直播采访最终是否进行？\n\n15 答：是。\n\n16 问：在该采访之前，中国政府是否做过任何对您而言意义重大的事情？\n\n18 答：是，几件。第一，4月17日，即采访前两天，\n\n19 中国外交部召见了美国之音驻北京记者，并一概地对他们说，如果你们进行采访——\n\n20 我们在那里有两人，其中一些人，他说，\n\n21 你们应当——你们不能进行采访；如果你们这样做，将\n\n22 严重损害美国之音与中国政府之间的关系。\n\n25 法院：抱歉，他们召见了您和其他\n\n1 人吗？\n\n2 证人：不是我。实际上，是我的北京\n\n3 记者。所以是中国外交部的两名\n\n4 官员来到我们的北京办公室。\n\n5 由格赖姆先生提问：\n\n6 问：龚博士，这对您有什么影响？\n\n7 答：哦，是的，在这种情况下，如果一个共产主义政府希望你\n\n8 不要做某事，也许你就应该做。次日，即4月18日，\n\n9 中国驻华盛顿大使馆给我的办公室、美国之音打电话，也许打了两三\n\n10 打次，每隔几分钟一次，要求我们停止\n\n11 采访。4月18日晚，在当晚——\n\n13 国际刑警组织北京办公室对\n\n14 郭先生发布了红色通缉令。\n\n15 问：这当然使您觉得——嗯，让我撤回这个问题。\n\n17 那么，龚博士，采访发生了。它是否\n\n18 完整进行？\n\n19 答：没有。本应是一小时的正式采访和\n\n20 两小时的网络聊天，这是一种非常流行的形式，\n\n21 网络聊天。因此，本应进行两小时的聊天。但当采访进入第二个小时，\n\n22 在第15分钟时，我接到了来自华盛顿的电话，我收到了\n\n23 来自华盛顿的短信，命令我立即停止采访。\n\n24 与此同时，我在华盛顿的制片人，即远程制片人，\n\n被命令切断信号，因此我们无法播出。\n\n问：龚博士——\n\n法院：请稍等一下。\n\n龚女士，您在回答问题时，请尽量放慢一些，以便法庭记录员能够记录下您的话。\n\n这对我们非常重要。\n\n证人：没问题。我道歉。而且我——\n\n另外，英语是我的第三语言，所以我会尽量更加——\n\n法院：不必道歉。慢慢来。\n\n证人：当然。\n\n格赖姆先生：我会尽量快些；您慢慢来。恐怕我自己的匆忙有一点影响到您了。\n\n由格赖姆先生提问：\n\n问：采访被缩短后，郭立即做了什么？\n\n答：采访一被切断，郭就像这样拍手，说：“太好了，太好了，太好了。”他说，嗯，采访本身可能不是新闻，但采访被中断是重大新闻。他对此非常高兴。\n\n问：接着您看到他做什么？\n\n答：然后他拿出手机，打了一通很长的电话。\n\n问：他打完电话后回来找您了吗？\n\n答：大约一小时后，是的。\n\n1 问：他说了什么？\n\n2 答：他说，北京情报部门内部的某人，\n\n3 他的朋友，告诉他，采访被中断是由美国之音内部的一名特工造成的，该人有名字，并且——\n\n5 我应该披露那个名字吗？\n\n6 问：不，我们并未要求您这样做，龚博士。\n\n7 答：没有。所以他回来告诉我们，那就是名字，那就是\n\n8 那个人。我和我的——五名记者坐在一起；我们\n\n9 六个人都在那里。立即，我这样做：\n\n10 我说，不，我们不要谈论此事，因为我知道我的职责；我的职责是\n\n11 向联邦政府报告。\n\n12 问：龚博士，请记住，我的问题只是郭做了什么。\n\n13 所以，我明白您有很多要说的，但为了快速推进，\n\n14 请尽量只回答我的问题，可以吗？\n\n15 答：可以。\n\n16 问：郭从那通长电话回来后，他看起来\n\n17 高兴、心烦？他的样子如何？\n\n18 答：他看起来相当高兴。\n\n19 问：他是否向您表示，他刚刚与其父母通话？\n\n21 答：没有，他说他与中国情报部门内的一名\n\n22 高级官员通话。\n\n23 问：他是否说，他刚刚听说有人用枪顶着其父母的头？\n\n25 答：没有，完全没有。我身边还有另外五名记者。\n\n1 问：他看起来是否受到了震动？\n\n2 答：没有。\n\n3 问：我们谈谈在采访之后你与郭文贵（Guo）的互动。\n\n4 你是否把他介绍给过其他人？\n\n5 答：是的，时不时会介绍给一批记者。\n\n6 问：你是否把他介绍给过比尔·格茨（Bill Gertz）？\n\n7 答：是的。\n\n8 问：采访之后，你与他当面交谈过多少次？\n\n9 答：你的意思是面对面吗？\n\n10 问：是的。\n\n11 答：嗯，超过十次，少于二十次。\n\n12 问：不论以何种方式，当面或通过电话，你与他交谈的频率是多少？\n\n13 答：嗯，我会说每月几次。\n\n14 问：你觉得自己与他发展出了友谊吗？\n\n15 答：是的。\n\n16 问：事实上，他是否给过你任何东西，即本案的任何材料？\n\n17 答：是的。\n\n18 问：他给了你什么？\n\n19 答：他给了我一个很厚的文件夹，大约有四英寸厚的材料，并给了我好几份，要求我把那些交给斯伯丁将军（General Spalding）和哈德逊（Hudson）的迈克尔·皮尔斯伯里（Michael Pillsbury）。\n\n20 问：他是否向你解释了他给你的是什么？\n\n21 答：他说是某个案件。当时我毫无概念。当时大约是在2019年初或年中。\n\n22 问：龚博士（Dr. Gong），郭先生是否曾就你的任何工作向你付费？\n\n23 答：没有。\n\n24 问：你是否曾要求他就你的任何工作向你支付报酬？\n\n25 答：没有。\n\n26 问：你与郭先生之间是否就他是否会因某事向你付款存在持续争议？\n\n27 答：没有。\n\n28 问：你与郭先生之间是否就他是否会帮助资助你的任何项目存在持续争议？\n\n29 答：没有。\n\n30 （下页继续）\n\n31 问：郭先生是否曾把你介绍给一名叫威廉·杰（William Je）的人？\n\n32 答：是的。\n\n33 问：那是在什么时候？\n\n34 答：2018年11月20日。\n\n35 问：当时是什么场合？\n\n36 答：那天上午，郭先生和班农先生（Mr. Bannon）举行联合新闻发布会。在那场新闻发布会上，他们宣布成立了一个法治基金会（Rule of Law Foundation）。他们在午餐时间宣布了这件事。我接到了一个电话。他说，郭先生邀请你、韩连潮（Lianchao Han）和比尔·格茨，你们三人到他的公寓共进午餐。\n\n37 问：好的。那么你是否——\n\n38 法庭：再次提醒你。请放慢速度，因为我们必须确保法庭记录员能够记录下来；我理解英语不是你的第一语言，所以请慢慢说。\n\n39 证人：好的。如果他们有问题，就打断我。我没问题。我的学生一直都是这么做的。好的。\n\n40 问：那么还有谁——我想，你后来参加了在郭先生公寓举行的午餐？\n\n41 答：是的。\n\n42 问：还有谁在那里？\n\n43 答：班农先生和威廉·杰先生。\n\n44 问：他是否被正式介绍给你？\n\n45 “他是我的管钱的人。有关钱的事，什么都问他。”\n\n46 问：那么杰先生对此有什么反应吗？\n\n47 答：他笑了。\n\n48 问：之后你是否与杰先生交谈？\n\n49 答：是的。我与杰先生交谈了。因为我听他讲了一句话，就认出了他的广东口音。所以我用粤语和他交谈。我是广东人，粤语是我的第一语言、我的母语。所以，你知道，当你用母语和别人交谈时，通常会透露信息。这种情况会发生。\n\n50 问：杰先生向你介绍了他自己的什么情况？\n\n51 答：杰先生告诉我，他曾在投资银行业工作，而且他还与许多中国省级政府部门合作。\n\n52 克莱因女士（MS. CLINE）：反对，请求以传闻证据为由删除该证词。\n\n53 法庭：让我问一个问题。实际上，是否还有进一步的证词可以支持该证词的可采性？\n\n54 格雷姆先生（MR. GREIM）：我会询问这如何影响了她后来作出的一个决定，但那会在稍后一点发生。\n\n55 法庭：我将删除该证词。\n\n56 格雷姆先生询问：\n\n57 问：龚博士，郭先生是否曾——我不是在问你所做的任何研究或报道、写作——但他是否曾与你谈及他为国家安全部（MSS）所做的工作？\n\n58 答：是的。\n\n59 问：他就此向你说了什么？\n\n60 答：他告诉我，当他在中国时，他与国家安全部密切合作，并为国家安全部工作；国家安全部是中国版的克格勃（KGB）。他说他支付了——他是个富人。他支付了他们人员的费用。他让他们使用他的办公场所，还支付了车辆费用，即他们使用的汽车费用；还包括在他最负盛名的酒店，北京通州（The Beijing Tongzhou）。那是该酒店的名称。\n\n61 问：他是否说过他为什么这么做？\n\n62 答：我还没有讲完另一部分。\n\n63 问：我明白。\n\n64 答：他说，他提供给国家安全部的空间，国家安全部占用了他酒店的一整层，始终与他合作。\n\n65 问：他是否说过他为什么这么做？\n\n66 答：为什么？\n\n67 问：是的。他为什么会向国家安全部提供那些资源？\n\n68 答：哦，是的。他说，国家安全部反过来帮助他对付——帮助他对付商业竞争对手，并且在一定程度上会为他写信。他们会帮助他，呃，反击并获得业务。所以，他出于商业原因与国家安全部合作。他与一个特定机构合作，即第17局——哦，不对，是国家安全部第17局。\n\n69 问：该局是做什么的？\n\n70 答：据我了解，该局专门与大型企业合作。\n\n71 问：郭先生是否说过，他与国家安全部中任何特定人士关系密切？\n\n72 答：是的，有几位。具体而言，我想到三个名字。第一个人的姓是马，M-a，名是J-i-a-n。姓马。马先生曾任——国家安全部书记部长、公安部长。据我从郭先生处了解到，马先生负责国际间谍活动和调查——不，是调查腐败。这是第一个。\n\n73 答：第二个人，郭先生告诉我，名为Y-u-e，姓为D-z-h-a-n-g。他是国家安全部的一名高级官员，也是郭先生的商业伙伴。他负责追捕中国异见人士；在纽约市就有几个人被Dzhang先生逮捕、审讯或酷刑折磨——\n\n74 问：那不是——在我们转到一个新领域之前，你能告诉我们第三个人是谁吗？\n\n75 答：第三个人名叫高辉（Hui Gao）。姓——名H-u-i，姓高，G-a-o。他是国家安全部调查——调查局之类的一个处长。\n\n76 问：抱歉。请继续。\n\n77 答：郭先生告诉我，他与高先生关系非常密切，高先生像他的弟弟一样跟在郭先生身边。高先生后来——\n\n78 法庭：不，不。现在只是问你与郭先生的谈话。请尽量将你的回答限于被问到的内容。\n\n79 证人：那就是我与——的谈话。\n\n80 法庭：并且请尽量简短回答，让律师提出后续问题。\n\n81 证人：好的。谢谢。\n\n82 格雷姆先生询问：\n\n83 问：龚博士，我知道你可能还有很多可以讲，但我想转到另一个话题。好吗？\n\n84 答：好的。\n\n85 问：郭先生是否告诉过你，在他来到美国后，他是否仍与国家安全部的任何人保持联系？\n\n86 答：是的，他告诉过我。\n\n87 问：他与谁保持联系？\n\n88 答：他说有许多高级官员，但没有告诉我姓名。\n\n89 问：他是否告诉过你，那些高级官员是否向他提供信息，以便他据此进行揭发检举？\n\n90 答：是的，他告诉过我。\n\n91 问：你是否观察到他实际上就从那些官员那里收到的任何信息进行揭发检举？\n\n92 答：我观察到他进行揭发检举，但是否来自那些官员，我无法作证。\n\n93 问：郭文贵在与你交谈时，是否曾批评异见人士？\n\n94 答：当时不多。有一些，但不多。不像今天。\n\n95 问：好的。你说“当时”。是指什么时候，2017年吗？\n\n96 答：2017年。\n\n97 问：那么，他对异见人士的批评是否随着时间推移而增加？\n\n98 答：是的。\n\n99 问：当他向你批评这些异见人士时，他通常声称他们怎样？\n\n100 答：他们为中国共产党，即中共（CCP）工作。\n\n101 问：那么，你本人是否认为他可能是正确的？\n\n102 答：我对此表示怀疑。\n\n103 问：龚博士，郭先生后来是否开始批评你？\n\n104 答：是的。\n\n105 问：那是在什么时候？\n\n106 答：在我辞去法治协会（Rule of Law Society）董事会职务之后，即2019年8月或9月。\n\n107 问：那么，在你辞职前几个月，你刚加入法治协会；对吗？\n\n108 答：是的。\n\n109 问：你辞职后，郭先生开始做什么？\n\n110 答：他开始在法治基金会和法治协会的YouTube频道上攻击我。\n\n111 问：他如何说你？\n\n112 答：起初，他没有以中共来攻击我。他攻击我，说我与许多男人上床；还用各种各样的名字辱骂我。后来，他攻击我，说我从中国情报部门收取大量金钱，以拆散他与班农先生。具体金额是\\$10 million。\n\n113 问：事实上，你是否从中国方面收取了\\$10 million，以拆散郭先生与班农先生？\n\n114 答：没有。\n\n115 问：龚博士，你是否曾收到郭先生的实际人身威胁？\n\n116 答：是的。\n\n117 问：他说了什么？\n\n118 答：他在社交媒体上、在其播报中、在他自己的社交媒体平台上公布名单。他具体列出姓名，有数十个名字。我想，我相信我是第8号。他要求人们攻击——把我们从地球表面抹掉。\n\n119 问：那么，你是否认为他只是在开玩笑？这只是一个表示玩笑的俚语吗？\n\n120 答：不。我严肃对待此事。\n\n121 问：你是否知道名单上的任何人实际受到其他人的骚扰？\n\n122 问：他是否对鲍勃·傅（Bob Fu）也做了同样的事？\n\n123 答：很多。他说鲍勃·傅是中共间谍，为中国政府做了很多事，并且应该被抹掉。因此，据他们自己所说，数十名郭文贵的追随者，受雇在鲍勃·傅家门前示威大约六周。所以鲍勃·傅不得不搬离——搬离那所房子。\n\n124 问：龚博士，我们继续。最后一个问题。他是否就你本周的证词对你作出任何威胁？\n\n125 答：是的。周一，法院案件开始时，他在他的GGB平台上播报了整整一个小时。他亲自——不仅辱骂我，称我是中共间谍，用各种非常，呃，肮脏的话骂我，还说我没有受过教育，我是下等人之类的；并且基本上给我起了类似妓女的绰号，诸如此类。因此在周一，郭文贵的一名追随者，他——\n\n126 法庭：我的意思是，你怎么知道那个人是郭文贵的追随者？如果你确实看到郭文贵本人在社交媒体上所做的事，我会允许你就此作证，但不能超出这一范围。\n\n127 证人：之所以说那个人是追随者，是因为郭文贵昨天与他合影，说你做得很好，而且他现在可能就在法院大楼前。\n\n128 格雷姆先生询问：\n\n129 问：龚博士，如果郭先生本人没有对你作出威胁——\n\n130 答：是的，他作出了。\n\n131 问：那么我只希望——那么，请仅就郭先生作出的威胁作证，而不要谈这个其他人。\n\n132 答：好的。郭先生在周一，即法院案件开始当天，在他的社交媒体平台上花了整整一个小时攻击我。自从我成为本案证人以来，我收到了如此多的骚扰。\n\n133 问：郭先生的威胁使你更可能还是更不可能就他发声？\n\n134 答：非常不可能。\n\n135 问：为什么？\n\n136 答：任何正常人都不会想要那么多麻烦。\n\n137 问：他的威胁对中国——对中国异见人士群体产生了什么影响？\n\n138 克莱因女士：反对。\n\n139 法庭：异议成立。\n\n140 格雷姆先生：没有更多问题。\n\n141 法庭：有交叉询问吗？\n\n142 克莱因女士：有，法官阁下。\n\n143 交叉询问\n\n144 克莱因女士询问：\n\n145 问：龚博士，你明白本次审判涉及东方利润（Eastern Profit）和战略（Strategic）两家公司之间的争议。\n\n问：Vision，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你对 Eastern Profit（东方利润）一无所知，对吗？\n\n答：不，一无所知。\n\n问：你对 Strategic Vision（战略远见）一无所知，对吗？\n\n答：我认识其所有者。\n\n问：你是否知道 Eastern Profit 与 Strategic Vision 之间的合同的任何情况？\n\n答：不知道。我与此毫无关系。\n\n问：你同意中国政治很复杂，对吗？\n\n答：是，所有政治都很复杂。\n\n问：而且我想你说过，如果共产党政府要你做某事，你就应当去做，对吗？\n\n答：我什么时候说过？\n\n问：我以为你今天下午早些时候说过。\n\n答：我说过中国政府要我做某事，我就做吗？不，我没有做。请查阅庭审记录。那不是我说的。\n\n问：你确实说过，你仍与中国大陆有一些联系，对吗？\n\n答：是。我母亲91岁。我必须不时给她打电话。\n\n问：这是否意味着你是共产主义者？\n\n答：你是什么意思？我不时给我母亲打电话。仅此而已。我从未说过，任何给父母和亲属打电话的人都是共产主义者。\n\n问：你于2017年4月首次见到 Guo（郭文贵）先生，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：从那时起至2019年的某个时候，你与他的关系一直很好，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：事实上，你把他视为你的朋友？\n\n答：这是一个是或否的问题。是，在 November 18th -- November 20, 2018 之前。在 November 20, 2018 之后，我开始产生怀疑。\n\n问：后来是否有一个时候，我想是在2019年，即2019年秋天，Guo 先生在媒体上发表了一些关于你的陈述，而你认为那些陈述不真实？\n\n答：他发表了很多不真实的陈述。\n\n问：而且他诋毁了你正试图制作的一部电影，对吗？\n\n答：他没有。他甚至不知道我在制作什么电影。\n\n问：关于你在证词中描述的美国之音访谈，你就该主题写了一些文章，对吗？\n\n答：是，我写过。\n\n问：好的。请调出 PX44。\n\n法院：Cline 女士，这在哪个文件夹里？\n\nCLINE 女士：法官阁下，您应当有一个单独装订的文件夹。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nCLINE 女士询问：\n\n问：请滚动到顶部。抱歉。我们必须为您滚动，不过，Gong（龚）博士，您可以看到一份我们标记为原告证物 44 的证物。这是否是你为 Wall Street Journal（《华尔街日报》）撰写的一篇文章或评论文章的副本？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：这份材料的日期是 May 23rd, 2017，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请翻页。我请你注意第一个完整段落，我想，是第一句——第二句。那里有一个名字，Chen（陈）先生。这是否是你先前在证词中提到的那名律师？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：好的。你在这里写道——你提到 Chen 先生，并且写道：“这位数年前逃往美国的盲人律师和人权活动人士估计，仅为了监视 Guo 先生，中国政府就花费了 10.5 million。”你看到了吗？\n\n答：不是 Guo 先生。是仅花在 Chen 先生身上。花在他身上，即 Chen 先生。\n\n问：好的。明白了。下一段写道——以“In the preinterview”开头的段落？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：该句写道：“Guo 先生解释说，他支付了办公室租金、私人飞机、监控系统、人员以及许多其他费用。”我读得对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：那是在为谁支付费用？\n\n答：为 MSS（国家安全部）支付。\n\n问：好的。而且你是在 May of 2017 报道此事的，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请转到 PX46。PX46 是你撰写的另一篇文章，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而这一篇是在 April of 2018 发表在 Washington Times（《华盛顿时报》）上的？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请转到 PX47。这是你写的另一篇文章，我相信该文发表在一个名为 Daily Caller（《每日呼声》）的媒体上，时间是在 May of 2018；对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请转到这篇文章的第三页。我请你注意以“Meanwhile;”开头的段落；你看到了吗？\n\n答：嗯，嗯。\n\n问：你必须口头回答。你看到了吗？\n\n答：是，我看到了。\n\n问：第二句写道：“Ma Jian（马建），中国国家安全部前副部长，因腐败被捕，承认他从 Guo 手中收取了数百万。”你看到了吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：在美国之音访谈时，你提到 Guo 已因揭露中国共产党高级领导人中的大规模腐败而声名鹊起，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你可以把那个撤下。2018年底，你得知 Elliott Broidy（埃利奥特·布罗伊迪）正与中国政府合作，要将 Guo 先生从美国引渡出去，对吗？\n\n答：是，Guo 告诉过我。\n\n问：请调出证物 PX50。证物 PX50 是你在 December of 2018 撰写的一篇文章或评论文章？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而且你在其中描述了你本人审阅过的 Elliott Broidy 所写的电子邮件，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你亲自审阅了这些电子邮件，然后报道说，随着选举临近，中国政府希望让 Guo 先生对 Xi Jinping（习近平）的批评噤声，对吗？\n\nGREIM 先生：对基础提出异议，除非她只是询问证人是否说过这些话。\n\n法院：驳回异议。\n\n答：请把该段给我看。我很乐意。\n\n问：请转到第二页。那么，在 PX50 第二页底部，你引用了一封你读过的由 Broidy 先生所写的电子邮件，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\nGREIM 先生：异议，基础。\n\n法院：驳回异议。\n\n问：我将读出来，然后问你我是否读得正确。因此，在第二页底部有一段斜体加粗的引文：“所涉国家与中国和美国关系良好，并提供了一个利润丰厚的机会。中国希望从美国引渡 Guo Wengui，他对 Xi Jinping 主席极为批评，目前作为逃犯居住在纽约市。Guo 欺骗了许多投资者，包括 Abu Dhabi（阿布扎比）的 $3 billion。We elections coming up in China this fall, the Chinese want him to be kept quiet. 我相信可以进行谈判，其中包括 Abu Dhabi 收回其 $3 billion，并由 Abu Dhabi 将 Guo 从美国引渡至 Abu Dhabi。之后，Abu Dhabi 将允许将其引渡至中国。我被告知中国会向我们付款，而且如果事实确实如此，我认为 Abu Dhabi 也会觉得有义务支付一笔费用。”我读得对吗？\n\n第168页\nL4MPEAS6\nGong - 交叉询问\n\n答：你读得正确，但那些不是我的话。\n\n法院：关于先前的异议，我接纳关于 Broidy 所写内容的陈述，并非为了证明其真实性，而只是为了弹劾该证人。\n\n问：这是你基于审阅 Broidy 先生电子邮件而于 December of 2018 报道的一段引文，对吗？\n\n答：是。这是我引用的一段话，但正如你先前所说，我没有写那句话。\n\n问：如果你能翻到 PX50 的第五页。请继续向下滚动至底部。在第五页，你报道如下：“在接下来的一个月，中国政府采取了一些关键举措，以引渡 Guo；Guo 作为 Hong Kong（香港）居民申请了政治庇护。”这是你写的一句话，对吗？\n\n答：这是我写的一句话。\n\n问：而且你的文章还谈到了前往美国访问 Guo 先生的中国政府官员，对吗？\n\n答：是，那是部长级的人物，是 MSS 的负责人之一，是最高级官员之一。类似 KGB 的二号人物，诸如此类。\n\n问：而且你知道 Broidy 先生后来因参与一项引渡 Guo 先生的计划而被起诉，对吗？\n\n问：而且你知道 Broidy 先生后来因参与一项引渡 Guo 先生的计划而被起诉，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\nGREIM 先生：异议，基础。\n\n法院：维持异议。\n\nL4MPEAS6\nGong - 交叉询问\n\n证人：好的。那么我是否应当——抱歉。我错过了。\n\n法院：所以，当我维持一项异议时，这意味着你不必回答该问题。\n\n证人：是。\n\n法院：当我说“驳回异议”时，这意味着你应当继续回答。\n\n证人：我明白。我只是没有——您知道，我当时在注意——对此抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n法院：哦，没关系。继续。\n\nCLINE 女士：如果我表述不当，敬请原谅，法官阁下。我是在试图奠定基础。\n\nCLINE 女士询问：\n\n问：那么问题是：作为一名深谙中国政治的记者，在你的工作过程中，你是否知道 Broidy 先生实质上因其在一项驱逐 Guo 先生计划中的角色而被起诉？\n\n答：这一点我并不知道。我以为他是因未登记为外国代理人而被起诉。\n\n问：你是否曾读过他的起诉书？\n\n答：我不记得。我不记得我读过。\n\n问：你是否曾读过他的认罪答辩？\n\n答：关于未登记为代理人，我读过新闻。我没有读过他的认罪答辩。\n\n问：因此，你在宣誓下的证词是，你从未读过他的认罪协议？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：尽管你是一名对华裔美国政治非常感兴趣的记者？\n\n答：那是马来西亚政治。\n\n问：在 March of 2018，你写了一封支持——让我打断自己。\n\nCLINE 女士：法官阁下，在我忘记之前，原告提交证物 PX44、46、47 和 50。\n\n法院：这些证物予以接纳，但须视撤销动议而定。我理解对于真实性没有异议；律师，是这样吗？\n\nGREIM 先生：抱歉，法官阁下。我没有——我面前没有这些材料。\n\n法院：它们全都是文章。\n\nGREIM 先生：我们对其中任何一份的真实性均无异议，正确。\n\n法院：这些证物予以接纳，但须视撤销动议而定。\n\n（原告证物 PX44、46、47 和 50 作为证据接纳）\n\nCLINE 女士询问：\n\n问：Gong 博士，当我们查看这些文章时，即你就美国之音访谈所写的三篇文章，你是否在其中任何一篇中——让我退一步。\n\n你作证称，当 Greim 先生向你提问时，在访谈被中断时，Guo 先生拍了拍手。我理解得对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：而你是否是在表示，你认为 Guo 先生对访谈被缩短感到高兴？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：在你所写的关于美国之音访谈及其被中断的三篇文章中的任何一篇里，你是否报道了 Guo 似乎因访谈被缩短而感到高兴这一事实？\n\n答：我本来不应当这样做，因为当访谈结束而谈话变为不记录在案时，发生的事情——我会采取——\n\n法院：女士，问你的只是一个简单问题。问题涉及你所写的文章。\n\n证人：是。\n\n法院：请法庭记录员从“在三篇文章中的任何一篇”开始宣读该问题。\n\n（宣读记录）\n\n证人：没有，我本来不应当。\n\n法院：我将删除“没有”之后的所有内容。你可以在进一步询问时进行询问。\n\nCLINE 女士询问：\n\n问：在 March of 2018，你写了一封给 United States（美国）的信。\n\n问：政府支持Guo Wengui（郭文贵）先生的庇护申请，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请调出被告方证物DX123。龚博士，我们向您出示一份标记为DX123的证物。前几页是一串电子邮件，随后请滚动到——我想是第三页。有一封信。在请您辨认该信之前，能否滚动到最后，让我确认一下那里的签名是您的？\n\n答：那是我的签名。\n\n问：好的。这是您为支持郭先生的庇护申请所写的信吗？\n\n答：看起来是。\n\n问：您在这封信中向美国政府所作的陈述，在您书写时是真实的吗？\n\n答：是真实的。现在仍然是真实的。\n\n问：让我们回到这封信的第一页。我请您注意该信第二段的第二句。该句写道：“郭先生多年来与中国情报部门密切合作，并声称他甚至资助过他们调查中国政府官员海外腐败行为的行动。”您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：尽管有这一事实，您仍支持他的庇护申请，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：在第2段中，您提到郭先生通过社交媒体开展揭露腐败的活动；您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：您在其中称，郭先生的帖子获得了数十万次浏览；对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：您说：“作为一名资深记者，我相信郭先生成功创造了一种‘自媒体’现象，尤其是在有关中国政府的问题上，推动了自己动手进行的调查性新闻报道”？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：那是一项真实陈述，对吗？\n\n答：现在仍然如此。\n\n问：让我翻页。这里的第三页中，我想是第三句，您指出，作为一名经验丰富的记者，您亲自以独立来源核实了他的一些重大报道；准确吗？\n\n答：是，非常准确。\n\n问：在下一段中，您说郭先生凭借来自政府内部的大量令人信服的证据，挑战了中国共产党领导人的合法性；这是真的吗？\n\n答：当时是的。\n\n问：我们来看第5段。在第5段中，您描述了一起事件：郭先生原定在Hudson访谈中发言，但该访谈被中断；对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：您了解到，该访谈是应中国政府的要求被中断的，对吗？\n\n答：是，我从Lianchao Han（韩连潮）先生那里得知的。\n\n问：然后我们往下看下一段。您提到郭先生的社交媒体账户被暂停一事，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：您还提到PRC——即中华人民共和国，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：他们雇用了一支由虚假账户组成的机器人大军，在YouTube上就郭先生提出投诉；对吗？\n\n答：那是我当时所相信的。\n\n问：您后来是否得知，事实上，Twitter删除了数千个被归属于PRC、针对郭先生的账户？\n\n答：请再重复一遍您的问题？我不明白。\n\n问：好的。您后来是否发现，事实上，Twitter删除了许多许多被认为由PRC拥有、并批评郭先生的账户？\n\n答：这不是一个简单的是或否的答案，因为我的账户曾在一夜之间被删除，持续了一晚，随后又恢复了。因此，我无法说明Twitter的动机。\n\n问：您是否曾读过有关Twitter删除了一批属于——撤回。您是否曾读过任何有关Twitter删除由中国政府设立的账户的文章？\n\n答：我看Twitter，不看文章。是在Twitter社交媒体上看的，不是从可信报纸或类似来源看到的。\n\n问：抱歉，我不记得我是否已经问过这个问题。请回到该信的第一页。在第四段中，当您讨论您与郭先生进行的访谈前会面时，您谈到——我认为我们是在另一篇文章的相同语境下看过此事。我只想确认，在这封您为支持他的庇护申请而写给美国政府的信中，您知道他曾为中国国家安全部支付办公室租金及其他费用这一事实，对吗？\n\n答：对。他支付了他们的行动费用。他支付了该间谍机构的行动费用。\n\n问：即使您知道这一点，您仍支持他的庇护申请，对吗？\n\n答：对，因为就像美国境内的任何KGB间谍，如果他们叛逃，我们会支持他们的庇护申请。\n\n问：您向政府提到，作为郭先生为MSS作出付款或购买的交换，MSS保护他免受其商业竞争对手的政治攻击，对吗？\n\n答：对，那是他告诉我的。\n\n问：而这正是您向美国政府报告的内容，对吗？\n\n答：对，是我报告的。\n\n问：请调出原告方证物PX59。抱歉，应当是PX59。本文件前几页只是认证文件，但我想看该文章的第3页。抱歉。我们先看封面页。请滚动到顶部。这是一篇由Stanford Cyber Policy Center（斯坦福网络政策中心）发表的文章。以您记者的身份，您是否曾接触过Stanford Internet Observatory Cyber Policy Center（斯坦福互联网观察站网络政策中心）？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：请跳过两页。这正是我之前问您的概念。我只是想提供一些背景。文章第一句写道：“2020年6月11日，Twitter宣布删除一组23,750个被归属于中华人民共和国的账户，技术指标显示，该行动与2019年8月被暂停的200,000个账户网络背后的同一行为者有关。”您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：在今天之前，您是否知道情况是这样？\n\n答：不知道。\n\n问：关于此事再问一个问题。请往下到第二段。第一句写道：“此次于2020年6月被归属于PRC的行动，与2019年8月的行动在议题上有相当大的重叠，特别涉及香港亲民主运动，以及攻击现已流亡美国的中国亿万富翁Guo Wengui。”您看到了我刚刚读的句子吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：以您这位深谙华裔美国政治的记者身份，这一与Twitter删除账户有关的事实是否引起过您的注意？\n\n答：几年前，我的账户被暂停时，这件事引起过我的注意。我给Rubio（鲁比奥）参议员写信，他——嗯，他——我知道他给白宫打了电话，我的账户大约十小时后恢复了。我对此有所关注，但当时我没有太多关注，因为我当时不是以记者身份工作，而是以电影制作人身份工作。\n\n问：但是，您——不过您知道Twitter删除了——\n\n问：您是否向Lianchao Han寄送过一封初始信函？\n\n答：是，我寄过。\n\n问：它与我们刚刚看的信不是同一封，对吗？\n\n答：他作了修改。\n\n问：您寄出的初始信函是被告方证物124，对吗？\n\n答：我必须——我没有看过那封信。\n\n问：请滚动浏览。\n\n答：初始信函短得多。对。这是初始信函。这是第一封信。\n\n问：Lianchao Han是否向您最终提交的信中加入了大量信息？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您仍然同意最终信函中的信息，对吗？\n\n答：对，我同意。\n\n问：我认为您证称，您支持郭先生，是因为您认为他是一名叛逃者？\n\n答：我认为他是从中国间谍机构叛逃出来的人。\n\n问：基于您今天所知，您今天还会写这封信吗？\n\n答：不会。\n\n问：为什么不会？\n\n答：我认为此后他的角色发生了变化，而且自那以后，他成为了一名异议人士猎手。\n\n问：您是否撤回了这封信？\n\n答：我向FBI（美国联邦调查局）报告，并向FBI作了解释，也向美国政府作了解释，包括美国参议院外交关系委员会、情报委员会成员，美国众议院外交事务委员会、情报委员会成员，FBI官员及其他一些人。我写信向他们解释。我向他们报告，并与他们进行沟通。\n\nGREIM律师：申请接纳被告方证物124。\n\n法庭：对此有异议吗？\n\nCLINE律师：没有，除了我要说，我也疏忽了提交123。\n\n法庭：对123有异议吗？\n\nGREIM律师：没有。\n\n法庭：123和124予以接纳。\n\n（被告方证物123和124作为证据接纳）\n\nGREIM律师：没有其他问题。\n\n法庭：原告方——我指向Cline律师——还有其他需要提交的证物吗？\n\nCLINE律师：抱歉。我们还希望提交PX59。\n\n法庭：对PX59有异议吗？\n\nGREIM律师：是的，我们对此提出异议。\n\n法庭：好的。59是——\n\n第168页\n\nL4MPEAS6 龚——复询\n\nGREIM律师：哦，法官阁下，我们实际上此前已对此提出异议，我认为在最初那批证物中，我们可能没有获得对此的裁定。\n\n法庭：好的。59予以接纳，但须服从删除证据动议。\n\n（原告方证物PX59作为证据接纳）\n\n法庭：龚女士，您可以离席了，法庭向您致谢。\n\n证人：谢谢。\n\n（证人离席）\n\n法庭：好的。在处理Wang（王）女士之前，原告方在其案件中还有其他需要提交的吗？\n\nCLINE律师：没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：除与王女士有关的问题外，被告方在其案件中还有其他需要提交的吗？\n\nGREIM律师：没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。让我就王女士的问题向Greim律师提问。Greim律师，关于王女士，有两个问题尚未解决。我的问题是，鉴于我们在本案中已经完成的其他所有事项，您确实还需要问那两个问题吗？\n\nGREIM律师：法官阁下，我认为需要。我必须说，我不完全确定会像我刚才那样准确地将其拆分，但我想集中说明我想提出的要点，即我希望证人说，是的，她同意Han Chunguang（韩春光）并不掌握有关百万美元存款的信息，那确实是真的；或者我希望她说，您知道，她没有提供该信息的原因，是出于一个我认为并不正当的理由，但我认为我想获得这两个答案中的一个。\n\n法庭：您是否已经在案卷中有了这样的记录，即Han Chunguang——我把名字读错了——即Han先生的名字在其他质询书答复中被提及，但没有在关于谁知道Strategic协议的问题答复中被提及？我的意思是，我确实质疑，在这个时候您是否还需要这个。\n\nGREIM律师：我想，如果我们可以，我是说如果我们可以——因为坦白说，我不相信证人——我不相信她的证词是真实的，即她认为他确实掌握信息却将其隐瞒。会使她陷入麻烦的事情，以及她所趋向的方向，我认为是不正确的。因此，有点讽刺的是，我并不想确立她就此作了虚假宣誓；我想依赖这一点。我想我们可以让它保持原状，因为我们有她对那些质询书所作的宣誓答复，其中没有列出Han Chunguang，所以我正在说服自己。我认为我们不需要继续追究此事，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nL4MPEAS6 龚——复询，第168页\n\n原告方还有什么吗？\n\n克莱恩女士（MS. CLINE）：\n是的，如果允许我陈述，法官阁下。\n我只是想确保我们对此理解一致。\n争议中的询问书是否为第12号，即要求确认每一名知悉Eastern（东方）要求返还$1 million保证金的人员？\n\n法庭：\n不是，我认为是——\n\n格雷姆先生（MR. GREIM）：\n实际上有好几项。\n\n法庭：\n是的，有若干询问书答复，询问书已在案卷中。我让证言记录保持开放，是因为有一个未决问题，我认为该证人可能面临就犯罪行为作出不利于自身陈述的风险，因此我认为，在她回答该问题或进一步回答该问题之前，她应当获得律师的建议。但询问书本身已作为证据提交。让我看一下我手头的询问书副本。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：\n格雷姆先生，这也是DX5吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n是的，法官阁下。而且——\n\n法庭：\n我认为该问题涉及第5号询问书中的部分内容：“确认每一名知悉该协议（包括该协议的谈判）的人员。”\n\n格雷姆先生：\n没错。我认为，一旦我们遇到障碍，我没有逐一询问这些问题，但实际上应当是第5号。让我从头开始。我现在可以作出记录，也可以稍后再进行辩论，因为这些内容已在案卷中；但我的意思是，应当包括第4号、第5号、第10号、第11号、第12号、第13号、第14号和第16号。\n\n法庭：\n是的，我认为您只是进一步确信自己不需要提出那个问题。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n我现在更加确信了。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n我还会说第17号。\n\n法庭：\n好的。所有内容均已作为证据提交。即使尚未作为证据提交，我也会接纳。无论如何，这是对方当事人的自认。您还有其他要补充的吗？我现在不需要就哪一版本的事实真实进行辩论。结案陈词时，您会就此向我辩论。但是，克莱恩女士，还有其他事项吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n我只是认为，对于答复是否如所拟定般准确，我们的看法不同。我有些担心，有人指称王女士（Ms. Wang）作伪证，而我们尚未给予她机会补正答复，并奠定基础说明我们为何认为答复准确。我理解答复就是现有的答复，但这感觉——\n\n法庭：\n我让案卷记录保持开放，仅仅是因为格雷姆先生有一些想问却不被允许问的问题，而不是为了让提出该证人的一方补正证言。因此，我认为你们必须接受现有案卷记录。我认为我已经相当明确地表示，我们已结束证言，你们已结束询问，克莱恩女士，并且没有人提出进一步问题以补正询问书，除非我遗漏了什么。我遗漏了什么吗？\n\n（续下页）\n\n克莱恩女士：\n我可以稍等片刻吗？\n\n（暂停）\n\n克莱恩女士：\n是的，所以我们有意没有在再询问中处理该问题，因为法官阁下让记录保持开放，并理解她应当聘请律师；她已经这样做了，这就是我们没有继续追问的原因。\n\n法庭：\n好的。那么，她现在在这里吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n她在。\n\n法庭：\n格雷姆先生，您准备好询问她了吗？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n法官阁下，我实际上没有任何问题要问她。\n\n我另外担心的是，外部旁听者可以获得案卷记录——该证人很可能已经听到了更多有关此事的内容，而现在她已有律师，他们可能一直在与她合作——我不想传唤一名证人，而她已有一套说法——我手头有我的答复，我对于当时的情况没有更多要问的。这是我们保持记录开放的唯一原因。我没有更多要深入询问的内容。\n\n法庭：\n让我问一个问题：对于有关询问书准备过程的任何问题，她会援引第五修正案吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n她不会。\n\n法庭：\n因为我让记录保持开放，我将允许她……\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\n你们二位可以共同向我提供一套统一的证物，其中包括已作为证据提交的证物、已向证人出示的证物，以及仍有未决排除动议的证物，按顺序从PX 1一直到DX，因为我现在面前有许多不同的证物夹，与其让我在不同证物夹中四处查找，有一套统一的证物会很有帮助。你们可以告知我将在何时提交，但我认为在结案陈词之前提交可能会有用。这要求太多吗，克莱恩女士？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n我认为我们可以处理。\n\n法庭：\n格雷姆先生？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n是的，法官阁下，我们可以做到。\n\n法庭：\n克莱恩女士，还有其他事项要向法庭提出吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n格雷姆先生？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n您是否希望我们向您提供一份关于不利推定事项的清单，比如我们曾提出并要求作出该推定的问题？\n\n法庭：\n不，我认为不需要。我认为你们应当将其留待结案陈词。我会担心，这样做会给你们一个提出论点的机会，而我没有给予原告就此提出论点的机会。\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\n就此提出论点。我认为我必须给予他们机会，不仅反驳你们所说的内容，而且强调他们希望强调的要点。\n\n格雷姆先生：\n嗯，法官阁下，了解我们的话，我们大概会那样做，所以我们将在结案陈词中提出我们的要点。如果您希望——因为我认为这是四要件测试——如果您希望对此获得更多内容，我想您会询问我们，我们也同样可以答复。\n\n法庭：\n我认为这对我而言是一个足够简单、可以自行研究的问题。\n\n在我审理本案的工作中，出现了一个法律问题，就此获得非常简短的补充书面意见将会有用。原告提出论点，认为该研究协议根据Virginia Private Security Services Statute（弗吉尼亚州私人安保服务法）无效。关于该具体法规的判例法极少。我认为有两个相关问题，如能就此获得书面意见，将对我有所帮助。\n\n第一，我希望获得关于该法规适用于在Commonwealth of Virginia（弗吉尼亚州联邦）之外进行的调查的书面意见。数名证人特别指出，此处的调查工作是在State of Virginia（弗吉尼亚州）之外完成的；如有任何相关判例法，该法规是否应被解释为适用于弗吉尼亚州联邦之外的行为，以及将其延伸适用于弗吉尼亚州联邦之外活动是否会在Commerce Clause（商业条款）下产生任何宪法问题，均将有所帮助。\n\nL4MKEAS7\n\n第二项有些相关的是，我相信其他州有与弗吉尼亚州法规类似的法规。其他法院对类似法规的解释不会对我具有约束力，但我想到，弗吉尼亚州法规下判例法的匮乏，或许可以通过审视其他一些州的法律而得到一定补充。因此，如果你们可以查看其他州法律中是否有任何对你们任一方有用的内容，并将其纳入书面意见，将会有所帮助。我认为同时提交十页双倍行距的书面意见会有所帮助。\n\n克莱恩女士，您可以提醒我本案何时进行结案陈词吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n星期五，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n要求在下周五营业结束前完成十页书面意见，是否太过分？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n所以您不需要在结案陈词之前收到它们？\n\n法庭：\n我认为不需要。\n\n克莱恩女士：\n原告方没有问题。\n\n法庭：\n被告方呢？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n我们可以做到，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n好的。除非克莱恩女士，您还有什么——\n\n还有什么吗？\n\n克莱恩女士：\n我们没有。\n\n法庭：\n格雷姆先生？\n\n格雷姆先生：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n我想说，我认为双方都对本案进行了非常出色的审理，我感谢你们努力在这一时间框架内完成全部工作，也感谢你们在COVID带来挑战的情况下所作的努力。\n\n有人提出了关于佩戴口罩时判断可信度和处理本案能力的问题，我认为所有证言都已顺利提交，我也能够作出可信度判断。因此，感谢各位帮助使程序高效进行。\n\n克莱恩女士：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n不客气。\n\n（休庭至April 30, 2021 at 1:00 p.m.）\n\n＊ ＊ ＊\n\n询问索引\n\n受询问人：\n页码\n\nGUO WENGUI（郭文贵）\n\n由格雷姆先生交叉询问 652\n\n由克莱恩女士再询问 752\n\nSASHA GONG（龚莎莎）\n\n由格雷姆先生主询问 758\n\n由克莱恩女士交叉询问 783\n\n由格雷姆先生再询问 800\n\n原告证物\n\n证物编号\n已接纳\n\n52 and 53 753\n\n70A 754\n\nPX44, 46, 47 and 50 792\n\nPX59 803\n\n被告证物\n\n证物编号\n已接纳\n\n48 651\n\n51 667\n\nDX76A 736\n\n35, 37, and 114 751\n\n123 and 124 802","key_entities":["Guo","Je","Kwok","CCP","MSS","William Je","Chinese Communist Party","CIPA"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":368,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":44963,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-07-25 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-07-25","updated_at":"2026-08-23 23:51:18"}