Author: MOS Translation Group – GBW

On 22 Jun 2021, Judge Lewis Liman of the US Southern District Court of New York filed the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the case of Eastern Profit Corporation Limited (Miles Guo) v. Strategic Vision US LLC (French Wallop and Michael Waller). The Court concludes that Eastern prevails on its claim that the agreement is void, and Eastern is entitled to restitution in the amount of $1 million that Strategic was never entitled to collect from Eastern. Miles Guo is an opponent of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Strategic is backed by the CCP and published defaming articles about Miles Guo. Miles Guo calls the verdict a significant victory for the Whistleblower Movement and the New Federal State of China because the CCP’s attempts to tarnish the reputation of Miles Guo and the Movement have been discredited by the US court. Below are the highlights from the judge’s report.

How did the case start?

Eastern is a shell corporation for Miles Guo, the founder of the Whistleblower Movement. French Wallop and Michael Waller are two consultants and key personnel of Strategic. Strategic agreed to conduct investigations on certain CCP persons for Eastern in exchange for a total of $9 million a year over a three-year period. Eastern paid $1 million to Strategic for setup and initial work. During the trial period, Eastern found Strategic’s work useless and terminated the agreement. Subsequently, Eastern sued Strategic. One major claim Eastern brought against Strategic is that the contract is illegal and void. Strategic brought counterclaims including fraudulent misrepresentation.

Strategic doesn’t have a license required to do investigatory work.

Virginia law requires persons who perform or contract to provide certain private investigatory work to have a license. Strategic engaged in such investigatory work without the license required, therefore, the agreement is void and Eastern is entitled to the $1 million refunds.

The judge finds Strategic’s claim of Miles Guo’s misrepresentation of his identity unconvincing.

Strategic claims that Guo misrepresented his identity. Wallop and Waller testified that they agreed with Guo because they believed that he was a CCP opponent but later they learned that Guo was affiliated with the CCP. The judge finds that Strategic has not proved a misrepresentation by Guo: (1) Strategic entered into the contract for the nature of the work, not for the shared belief with Guo. Strategic, who offered private investigatory work, did no investigation into Guo’s identity or allegiances before signing the agreement. (2) There was public information suggesting Guo was not genuinely opposed to the CCP when negotiating the agreement, but Strategic did not do any investigation. (3) There is no clear and convincing evidence as to whether Guo is a supporter or opponent of the CCP. The judge writes, “Guo asserted forcefully at trial that he was an opponent of the CCP. But other witnesses testified with equal force as to their belief that he was a friend of the CCP.” Although the judge doesn’t make any judgment about Guo’s affiliation, the judge points out Strategic’s argument unconvincing, which implies that Strategic lacks credibility and Guo is not a CCP supporter. We can see that the judge doesn’t care about personal political affiliation but he will catch someone who lied.

Sasha Gong contradicted herself.

Sasha Gong, ex VOA Chinese language service chief, is Strategic’s key witness to testify that Guo was a secret supporter of the CCP. Sasha Gong argued that Guo had associations with certain CCP political leaders and later harassed her. The judge sees Sasha Gong’s testimony being undermined by the fact that she wrote a letter to the US government supporting Guo’s application for asylum and claiming that he was an opponent of the CCP. The judge does not mention Sasha Gong’s true identity, but according to Miles Guo’s GTV broadcast, Sasha Gong is a registered spy of the CCP and a fake dissident. Regarding attacking Chinese fake dissidents, Guo testified that “I have never initiated any attack on any Chinese person. Always it was they who attacked me, then I retaliate.”

Elliott Broidy paid Strategic’s legal fee.

The timing of Strategic’s counterclaim of fraud is very interesting. Strategic didn’t file a counterclaim for fraud in its initial pleadings. The judge writes “it (Strategic) only asserted such claim after it received litigation funding from an alleged opponent of Guo with an interest in undermining his assertions of hostility to the CCP, a wealthy United States businessperson named Elliott Broidy, whose credibility also is subject to question.” Although the judge doesn’t go further into the source of the legal fee, in the GTV broadcast, Miles Guo revealed that Bruno Wu, a CCP agent funneled the money to Strategic through Broidy.

Reading between the lines of the judge’s report, one can see the workings of the US justice system, the hypocrisy of the Washington DC consultants, and the ugly faces of the CCP-backed fake dissidents. Eastern vs. Strategic is a great example of how Miles Guo won the prolonged legal war against the CCP. Persistence, upholding the truth, and trust in the rule of law is essential.

Proofreader: Irene | Posted by Irene

More information, follow us 

New York MOS Himalaya GTV

New York MOS Himalaya MOS TALK

New York MOS Himalaya |Twitter (EN)

New York MOS Himalaya |Twitter (CN)

New York MOS Himalaya |YouTube