New Ruling in Mar-a-Lago Intruder Case Raises Question of Chinese Espionage

“Clearly this is different than an ordinary trespassing case.”

Yujing Zhang at a court hearing on April 15, 2019.Daniel Pontet/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Since Donald Trump was sworn in as president, his frequent visits to Mar-a-Lago, his private Palm Beach club, have raised counterintelligence concerns: Were foreign spies targeting the facility to gain access to Trump, his family, or his associates? On Wednesday, a federal judge in Florida suggested there was indeed reason to worry. 

Overseeing the case of a Yujing Zhang, a Chinese woman arrested at the club in March for trespassing and lying to a federal agent (and who was found to have an array of electronic devices in her possession), US District Court Judge Roy Altman issued an extraordinary order that federal prosecutors can submit to him classified evidence about Zhang without sharing it with her. He said this was because disclosure of this material “could cause serious damage to the national security of the United States.” In other words, this case—according to the prosecutors—was not a simple trespassing case; it somehow involved secret information. 

The ruling enables prosecutors to invoke a provision in a 1980 law, the Classified Information Procedures Act, that allows them to deny a defendant certain evidence to preserve secrecy. Altman’s order says that “none of the classified information is exculpatory” for Zhang. The judge previously granted Zhang’s request to fire her court-appointed lawyers and represent herself in the case, while calling it a “very bad decision.”

Neither Altman nor prosecutors have said more about the classified evidence. Zhang, who has pleaded not guilty, has denied she engaged in espionage, and she is not charged with being a spy. But the order suggests that federal officials could well be investigating whether Zhang is connected to Chinese intelligence.

“Clearly this is different than an ordinary trespassing case, and one can only infer that it is related to Zhang’s nationality, and any related intelligence or surveillance that might be connected with her or with China,” said Steven Aftergood, who directs the the FAS Project on Government Secrecy and who has written about the 1980 law.

Citing sources familiar with the case, the Miami Herald reports that investigators are “looking into [Zhang’s] suspected intelligence activities in the United States and around the world on behalf of the Chinese government” as part of a broader probe into Chinese “spying in South Florida and local business people suspected of acting as assets and intelligence-gatherers for the Chinese government.” That probe, the Herald has reported, has also focused on Cindy Yang, a former massage parlor owner who launched a business offering Chinese travelers access to Mar-a-Lago, Trump, his family, and other Republican officials.

According to her former lawyers, Zhang, a Chinese citizen, traveled from Shanghai to Palm Beach to attend a previously scheduled March 30 fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago. Yang had promoted the event on a Chinese social media site as an opportunity interact with influential Americans, including Trump’s sister, Elizabeth Trump Grau. Yang billed the event as a “once-in-a-lifetime publicity opportunity” attended by “Chinese elites from various countries.”

Zhang paid a mysterious Chinese businessman named Charles Lee $20,000 for a travel package that included a ticket to the event. Lee, who has ties to the Chinese government, had repackaged a ticket acquired from Yang. But when Zhang arrived at Mar-a-Lago on March 30, the fundraiser had been canceled—apparently a result of media coverage of Yang that included reports by Mother Jones. Zhang, displaying two Chinese passports, talked her way into the club, falsely claiming she planned to use the pool, according to a Secret Service agent. She was later detained at a reception area in the club and found to be carrying carrying four cellphones, a laptop, and a thumb drive. Investigators found in her hotel room more electronics, including a device that detects hidden cameras, along with more than $8,000 in cash.

Zhang, who says she has worked for a private equity firm in Shanghai, is scheduled to face trial starting on August 19.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate