Yao Yao Jiang Exclusive: $265 Bill Confirms Zhang Wanying's Mysterious Lover
In this episode, Yaoyao Jiang uses open-source intelligence (OSINT) to analyze a $265.25 hotel bill made public by the FBI in the Zhang Wanying case. She exclusively uncovers the identity of the companion, Miao Fatai, as well as his extramarital affair and commercial investment ties with Zhang Wanying. She also analyzes how the prosecution utilized this chain of relationships during the bail review hearing on October 14 to argue that Zhang Wanying has ties to state security (MSS) and poses a flight risk.
Video link:
Full text:
Hello everyone, I am Yaoyao Jiang, who loves to think and values logic. Some time ago, we produced two episodes based on the FBI affidavit and court materials, discussing how Zhang Wanying was accused of accepting instructions from Chinese officials to stalk the family of Lai Ching-te's son in Seattle, as well as her failed attempt to apply for bail. For those who haven't seen them, you can click the link in the pinned comment.
On October 14, Zhang Wanying appeared in court for the third time. This was not just a simple repeat of the previous bail hearing. On October 7, the federal magistrate judge denied her bail; the defense then requested the federal district judge to review the original detention decision, which led to the second bail defense battle. During this review, the federal prosecutor stated for the first time that the unnamed companion mentioned in the previous two episodes did not just accompany Zhang Wanying to Seattle to carry out a mission, but also had a romantic relationship with her. This case suddenly took on a scandalous tone.
I am not a gossip blogger. But by following a $265.25 hotel charge in the FBI documents, I played Sherlock Holmes for once, using open-source intelligence analysis to exclusively—and I mean exclusively—dig up the hotel stay records that the prosecutor did not fully spell out. Today, we will start by talking about who this mysterious companion is.
Since I am playing Sherlock Holmes, the first step is not to guess whether these two slept together, but to turn the companion from an anonymous code in the FBI documents into a real person. The name Miao Fatai did not initially appear in the criminal complaint made public by the FBI. The document only referred to him as "Individual 1." However, he left behind the address of a house.
When the two rented a car in Seattle, a residence on Walnut Avenue in Arcadia, California, appeared in the registration materials. The FBI specifically noted that this property was sold around September 11, 2025. A CBS reporter traced the property records using the address and sale date and found that the house sold on that street on that day was owned by Miao Fatai. An anonymous code was thus identified through the transaction record of a house.
CBS subsequently interviewed Miao Fatai's son, Miao Jiaqi. Miao Jiaqi said that his father and Zhang Wanying had known each other for over ten years. The two first met because of real estate transactions. About ten years ago, when Zhang Wanying was renovating her own home, she even lived in the pool house of the Miao family's Arcadia residence for several months. Neighbors also said they recently attended a dinner party where both Miao Fatai and Zhang Wanying were present. Real estate dealings, temporary rentals, private gatherings, and long-term interactions had connected the two for more than a decade.
This clearly was not a helper found temporarily in September 2025. Public real estate records show that Zhang Wanying has long been involved in transactions related to Miao Fatai himself, the Miao family address, and associated properties. In 2025, a six-bedroom mansion owned by Miao Fatai in Arcadia was sold through Zhang Wanying for approximately $4 million. CBS also found that Miao Fatai serves as the head of several real estate investment and construction companies.
Let us look at Zhang Wanying again. According to an investigation by the New York Post based on public property records, Zhang Wanying and her husband allegedly jointly own seven residences, with an estimated value of about 11 million dollars. The couple sold the properties they held, with cumulative transaction amounts approaching 16 million dollars. Zhang Wanying herself handled at least 125 real estate transactions over the span of a decade, with a total amount exceeding 100 million dollars.
Miao Fatai is the same; family, real estate, companies, and investments are all signs of financial capacity. Moreover, prosecutors told the judge on October 14 that Miao Fatai reportedly owns about 100 million in assets in China, with the currency yet to be determined. Whether it is 100 million RMB or 100 million US dollars, it makes no difference to the question of whether Miao Fatai could afford another hotel room. He could afford it. Zhang Wanying could afford it too.
In the previous episode, we have already detailed the operation in Seattle, so we will not elaborate on it here. Friends who haven't watched it can go back and catch up; just remember three things: the two went and returned together, staying in Seattle for one night; Miao Fatai paid for the car rental, and Zhang Wanying paid for the airfare and hotel.
Page 17 of the FBI affidavit leaves an inconspicuous figure of 265.25 US dollars. According to bank records provided by JPMorgan Chase, the FBI wrote that on September 2, 2025, a credit card under Zhang's name recorded a consumption of 265.25 US dollars, and the merchant name was "Marriott Seattle Airport." The document also noted that the hotel expenses were paid by Zhang Wanying. At 8:42 PM the previous night, she and Miao Fatai had already returned the rented car. The next day, the two returned to Los Angeles together. In other words, this amount falls precisely on the night they stayed in Seattle.
The following is an exclusive investigation we conducted based on open-source information. Step one, we need to find this hotel. Entering the merchant name from the FBI document into the Marriott official website, you can find the Seattle Airport Marriott. The address is 3201 South 176th Street, SeaTac, about half a mile from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. According to data from Visit Seattle, this hotel has 462 rooms. Alright, the hotel is locked down.
Step two is to find the room rate for the night of September 1, 2025. We first checked the official Marriott website. You can see the room types on the official website and also enter dates to check prices, but because the page is dynamically generated, entering dates today cannot restore the listed price from one year ago. Wait, we also checked Google Hotels and several booking sites, hoping to find saved historical quotes. Online, you can see the prices of this hotel on different dates, as well as king and double queen room types, but there is no reliable historical page that can directly prove what the pre-tax price on September 1, 2025, actually was.
This investigation seemed to hit a dead end here, but the FBI has given us a harder number than the webpage list price: the total amount actually posted on the credit card was 265.25 US dollars. As long as we find the applicable tax rate and fixed fees on the night of the incident, we can inversely calculate the pre-tax room rate. Thus, we turned to check the Washington State Department of Revenue, whose website keeps a schedule of accommodation tax rates for each quarter. We found that the accommodation tax rate and effective change date for the third quarter of 2025 were from July 1 to September 30, so it perfectly covers September 1 when they checked in.
In the official table, the charges for large hotels in SeaTac are broken down into three items: a combined sales tax of 8.7%, a special hotel tax of 1%, and a King County convention center tax of 2.8%. Adding the three items together, it is exactly 12.5%. On the same line, there is also a fixed fee: TPA, two dollars. What is TPA? We continued to track the 2 dollars. Public materials from the Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority on the Port of Seattle website state very clearly: within the tourism promotion areas of SeaTac, Tukwila, and Des Moines, hotels with more than 90 rooms charge a fixed 2 dollars per night for every occupied room sold. The Seattle Airport Marriott has 462 rooms, so of course it is within the collection scope.
Therefore, these two dollars are not "miscellaneous fees" temporarily inserted to match the answer, but a tourism promotion fee that every room of this hotel must charge per night. To prevent misreading the table, we found another piece of cross-evidence: an industry association that held a meeting at the Seattle Airport Marriott explicitly wrote in its booking instructions that in addition to the negotiated single or double room rate, a 12.5% tax and a 2-dollar tourism promotion fee are added. The room rate is not the rate from the night of the incident, but the fee structure is completely consistent: 12.5%, plus 2 dollars.
Now let's calculate backwards. First, subtract the fixed two dollars from 265.25 dollars, leaving 263.25 dollars. Then, divide by 1.125, and the result is exactly 234 dollars. Now let's calculate forward again: 234 dollars for the room, multiplied by 12.5%, the tax is 29.25 dollars; 234 plus 29.25, plus 2, is exactly 265.25 dollars. Not a cent off. This shows that this 234 dollars is not a reference price we happened to see on a hotel booking website, and certainly not a number forced in to make the equation work. It is the actual pre-tax room rate reverse-engineered from the real credit card charge amount held by the FBI, based on the official tax rate and fixed fees applicable in the quarter the incident occurred.
Next is the most critical question: how many rooms can 265.25 dollars actually buy? The answer is only one. One room at 234 dollars, including taxes and fixed fees, is exactly 265.25 dollars. Two rooms at the same price would cost 468 dollars before tax; adding 12.5% tax and two dollars per room, the total should be 530.50 dollars. 265.25 dollars is exactly half of 530.50 dollars.
We also checked the room types. The Marriott official website lists rooms with one king bed and rooms with two queen beds. The public quote page shows both room types, sometimes at the same price. Therefore, the 234 dollars cannot tell us whether there was one bed or two beds in the room, but the number of beds is not important; there was only one room. Our investigation is very clear: on the night of September 1, 2025, Zhang Wanying and Miao Fatai stayed together in one room at the Seattle Airport Marriott.
Now let's put the clues together: the two went and returned together, executing a mission together. The FBI recorded a hotel charge that exactly paid for one room. The CBS interview with Miao Fatai's son proves that the two have known each other for over ten years. To prevent Zhang Wanying from being released at the bail review on October 14, the supplemental declaration submitted by the FBI agent on October 13 explicitly stated: they had a romantic relationship. It is this new document that, for the first time, claims that Miao Fatai and Zhang Wanying had a romantic relationship, which also confirms our investigation findings regarding their hotel stay record.
And the asset status of the two proves that they had no need to share a room to save money, especially since both are currently in their respective marriages. According to common sense, if they were just normal friends, it is unlikely they would have booked only one room.
During the first court hearing, the prosecution discovered that Zhang Wanying had a bank account in China with 190,000 dollars in funds. This time, the supplemental declaration submitted by the FBI explains the business behind this money more clearly for the first time. FBI agent Holt stated that after checking Zhang Wanying's iCloud, WhatsApp, and iMessage communications, he found that she was suspected of coordinating an unlicensed cross-border money transfer business: that is, helping people transfer funds from China to the United States and profiting from it.
The document says the profits generated by this arrangement reached hundreds of thousands of dollars. In 2024 and 2025 alone, at least 190,000 dollars entered Zhang Wanying's Chinese bank account, and this business continued afterward. In other words, in the previous episode, we only saw a sum of money, but this new document reveals a continuously operating cross-border money laundering chain.
The same document also mentions for the first time that Zhang Wanying discussed her investment in a nightclub in Shanghai. Note, it is investing in a nightclub, not visiting a nightclub, nor just holding a membership card. Many Americans hearing about investing in a nightclub might only understand it as putting in some money and getting some shares. But if you put this in the context of China, this understanding is a bit naive.
In China, nightclubs are classified as song and dance entertainment venues. Before opening, one must obtain an entertainment business license and a business license, and pass fire safety inspections. After obtaining the licenses, one must register with the local public security and police department within fifteen days. Taking the public management requirements of the Shanghai police as an example, operators must submit floor plans, fire safety inspection certificates, security systems, emergency plans, proof of security guard deployment, and CCTV layout to the public security organs one by one.
After officially opening, security monitoring, personnel registration, attendance, and safety inspections are all under the guidance and inspection of the local police. This is not a one-time deal that ends after getting the license. Systems such as culture and tourism, public security, fire safety, market supervision, and anti-narcotics can continuously enter the premises for inspections. Public security organs check surveillance, employee rosters, and business logs. Shanghai discos are even required to configure security screening equipment under police guidance, and security guards and staff are responsible for security checks during business hours.
So, why are nightclubs watched so closely? Because private rooms, alcohol, cash, late-night operations, and complex personnel are inherently the places where prostitution, gambling, drugs, fighting, and organized crime are most likely to gather. Official Chinese anti-organized crime materials list entertainment venues such as karaoke halls, dance halls, and bars as key targets for investigation regarding organized prostitution, operating casinos, drug trafficking, and the protective umbrellas behind them.
Therefore, running a nightclub in China means money is merely an admission ticket. What truly determines whether it can open, operate safely in the long run, and continuously make a profit is whether the operator can navigate through the layers of culture, fire safety, market regulation, and police Public Security. To put it more bluntly, having strong backing and connections with the local Public Security Bureau in China is not just icing on the cake for a nightclub business; it is the infrastructure that allows this business to exist long-term. This rule is not written on any business license, but it is a reality understood by everyone in this business.
Currently, public documents do not state what this nightclub is called, how much Zhang Wanying invested, who the other shareholders are, or which specific police official she knows. However, if the investment discovered by the FBI from his communications is true, it indicates that Zhang Wanying has more than just an asset in China. Her ability to enter the Shanghai nightclub business means that she was not just dealing with ordinary official-business relations, but a network capable of coordinating local Public Security, fire safety, culture and tourism, and commercial interests.
This dug his roots in China even deeper. He didn't just have relatives and a bank account; he had cross-border money transfer businesses, nightclub investments, and the local connections and protective layers required to maintain such businesses.
At the review hearing on October 14, the defense was still playing the family card. Her husband and two daughters were both in the United States, their property could be mortgaged, and she could remain at home under surveillance—what was there to worry about? Zhang's lawyers wanted to prove that she had neither the reason nor the capability to flee. Assistant U.S. Attorney Colin Scott did not continue to dwell on real estate and ankle monitors. He wanted to tell the judge that this was not a question of whether a person wanted to escape, but a matter of the state resources and power involved behind the scenes.
In the previous two episodes, we have consistently referred to the person who assigned the Seattle mission as the Hangzhou Senior. The criminal complaint listed him as "Chinese Government Official No. 2." This time, Scott explicitly stated his affiliation, saying that the person who assigned the surveillance mission to Zhang Wanying was an official from the Ministry of State Security (MSS). "Old classmate" was just a title used on WeChat. Sitting at the upper end of the task chain was an MSS official.
Next, the prosecution brought Miao Fatai before the judge. That day, Zhang Wanying's husband sat in the gallery. Yet the prosecution argued that the husband and children might not necessarily keep her in the United States because she had long lived a double life. Her family did not know she had accepted missions from MSS officials, nor did they know about her romantic relationship with Miao Fatai, let alone that the two had gone to Seattle together. The court does not try extramarital affairs.
The prosecution argued that this romantic relationship would dismantle the defense's most important grounds for bail. The defense argued that her husband and children were the guarantee that she would not flee, but the prosecution's retort was direct: How could a husband who knew almost nothing about his wife's other life possibly become a safety rope the court could trust? The prosecution even batted down the image of a good mother sculpted by the defense. Having two daughters only proved she had a family; it did not prove that this family could stop her.
The defense played the same old card: Zhang Wanying's passport had already been confiscated, coupled with an electronic ankle monitor, how could she run? Scott's response was heavier. He stated that Zhang Wanying could obtain help from the Chinese state security department, and the Chinese side could help her obtain a new passport and arrange a special plane to assist her in leaving the United States. Of course it is difficult for ordinary people to leave the country without a passport, but what the prosecution worried about was not an ordinary person buying a ticket and forcing her way through by herself, but whether the Chinese government would prepare new documents and transportation for her. The electronic ankle monitor could sound an alarm when she left home, but it could not stop the new passport and special plane mentioned by the prosecution.
The prosecution's concluding point was very straightforward: Zhang did not need to start from scratch upon returning to China; there were funds, businesses, connections, and Miao Fatai, who had already returned and possessed financial capability. What the judge needed to judge was not whether Zhang Wanying loved her husband or Miao Fatai, but who truly had the ability to keep her in the United States. What the defense brought out were her husband, daughters, and real estate. What the prosecution brought out, however, were the MSS, a new passport, a special plane, and an intimate man who had already returned to China. The husband and children were originally the heaviest card in the defense's hand, but after the MSS and Miao Fatai appeared simultaneously, this card suddenly became light.
U.S. District Judge Serena Murillo ultimately refused to overturn the original detention decision. Zhang remains detained. Now, looking back at that $265.25 hotel bill, what it uncovered was far more than just two people renting a few rooms. This bill illuminated all three roles of Miao Fatai: he was Zhang's intimate man, and also her task partner who accompanied her to Seattle. In the prosecution's flight argument, he became the person on the Chinese side who could catch her.
Extending this line upward led to the MSS official, the "Hangzhou Senior"; extending it downward led to Miao Fatai. One assigned the task, the other accompanied the operation, and Zhang Wanying connected both ends. Therefore, this was not news about an extramarital affair; the issue did not lie in the romantic relationship itself, but in how this relationship was brought into a secret mission assigned by the Chinese MSS. An old classmate became a task superior, an intimate man became an operational helper, and business and romance became the prosecution's perceived escape routes.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) does not necessarily need to dispatch a strictly trained professional agent every time it conducts operations overseas. It can recruit people through alumni connections, business relationships, and romantic entanglements; whoever is convenient is brought into the operational chain. Miao Fatai has not been publicly indicted yet. However, public materials have already made it impossible for him to continue hiding behind the label of a "fellow traveler." The romantic scandal is merely the surface; beneath it lies an operational chain showing how state security (MSS) missions function through personal relationships. That is all for today.
If you find this episode valuable, please like, subscribe, and share.
For those who haven't seen the background, you can check the pinned comment for the previous two episodes. I am Yao Yao Jiang, who loves to think and values logic. See you next time.