President Trump and Xi Jinping met during the G20 summit. What surprised the American team the most?
Larry Kudlow:“ President Xi engaged in a level of detail — you could even say he was selling this.”
Xi backed down from a tough tit-for-tat stance， what is the real reason?
“China feels like it’s economically breaking down since its economy has been going downward while the American economy is improving. ”
The Dow fell 800 points after the summit due to competing accounts from the White House and Beijing. Does the American public really believe Chinese media?
Greg Autry（Assistant Professor of Clinical Entrepreneurship in USC Marshall School of Business / The Co-author of The Book 《Death by China》）: “When the market moves, it’s because investment bankers and financial professionals who are aligned with the Chinese side of things are unhappy. ”
Is Trump close to hitting a homerun in the trade war with China?
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：欢迎收看《世事关心》，我是萧茗。在上周G-20峰会期间进行的川-习会，让许多人感到意外。在峰会召开之前，大多数专家预言这个会晤不会取得什么成果。川普会坚持要求中共进行经济结构改革，而习近平不会答应。最终是北京一如既往的只说不做，中共会采取拖延战术来设法维持现状。但这次不一样了，习近平在会晤一开始就做了30-45分钟长篇讲话，他详细介绍了中共的实质性让步。看起来习近平确实想取信于美方，他真的要放弃那些他以前一贯坚持的东西吗？如果是这样，那么是什么原因促成了这一转变？在这期《世事关心》里，让我们一起来探讨。
Welcome to 《Zooming In》, I am Simone Gao. The Trump-Xi meeting at the G-20 summit last weekend took many people by surprise. Before the summit, most pundits predicted there would be very little outcome. Trump would persist on structural changes and Xi would refuse. Most likely Beijing will revert to its old tactics of agreeing to something but never really doing it. They would intend to buy their time in order to come up with new ways to maintain the status quo. But this time it felt different. Xi Jinping kicked off the conversation with a 30-45 minute monologue. He detailed a substantial concession list from the Chinese side. It seemed he did everything to prove his commitment before the American hawks. Does he really want to give up what he absolutely wouldn’t before? If so, why the change of heart? Let’s explore the causes in this episode of《 Zooming In》.
After the Trump-Xi meeting at the G20 summit, accounts from Beijing and the White House about what the two leaders discussed and agreed on didn’t match up.
According to a White House press release, President Trump agreed to leave tariffs at 10 percent on $200 billion dollars’ worth of product starting January 1st, 2019. He will not raise it to 25 percent at this time. China agreed to purchase a substantial amount of energy, industrial, and other products from the United States to reduce the trade imbalance between the two countries. China agreed to start purchasing agricultural products from American farmers immediately.
The White House also said Trump and Xi agreed to immediately begin negotiations on structural changes with respect to forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft, services and agriculture. Both parties agree that they will try to complete the transfer in the next 90 days. If they can’t reach an agreement within 90 days, 10% tariff will increase to 25%.
Larry Kudlow, the director of the national economic council, attended the Trump-Xi meeting. He described what he observed in a teleconference with the media.
Larry Kudlow（美国国家经济委员会主任）：“我认为这是一个非常、非常、非常重大的事件。这次会晤涉及的话题很广，也很具体。这种情形我们以前从来没遇到过。另外，我们也从来没有见过习近平这样亲历亲为。事实上，晚宴非常棒。首先，这是我第一次近距离地接触习主席，我对他一点都不了解。所以，我看到了川普总统与习主席之间的交情。你知道，我们一直听说他们是好朋友等等，我真的看到了。第二，我想说的是，习主席探讨了具体细节，甚至可以说他想强调自己对细节的掌握程度。因为在我看来，作为国家元首，这么做是非同寻常的，按理像我这样的人才应该知道细节，但是他知道，他自己直接上场。事实上，副总理、高级经济专家刘鹤告诉了我们，在晚宴前我们和刘举行了两次单独会谈。周六，第二次会谈时，刘特意说明了此事。他说：‘我什么也不说，由习主席来说。’这很不寻常，于是我们报告给了川普总统。他没有一带而过，他准备得很充分。因此给我留下了深刻的印象。我觉得这一点证明了中国的承诺。也可能我错了，但我相信是这样。 ”
“I think this is just an enormous, enormous event. Enormous event. This one covers so much ground and so much detail. We’ve never seen this before. And furthermore, we’ve never seen the hands-on participation by President Xi before. In fact, that dinner was quite remarkable. First of all, I — it’s the first time I’ve seen President Xi up close and personal. I don’t know him at all. So I saw the chemistry between President Trump and President Xi. You know, we’ve been hearing that they’re friends and so forth. I actually saw it. And I secondly want to note that President Xi engaged in a level of detail — you could even say he was selling this, which was, in my opinion, quite unusual for the head of state. Guys like me are supposed to know the details. He did. He made the pitch himself. Vice Premier Liu He, the top economic economics guru, as you know, actually told us — we had two private meetings with Liu before the dinner. Steve Mnuchin and Bob Lighthizer and I met privately with Liu — we all know him pretty well at this point — and some of his deputies. And then of course, reported back to the President and we — and our group convened on the meetings. But what I want to say is, Liu kind of flagged it in the second meeting Saturday. He said, ‘I’m not going to say anything. It’s going to be President Xi.’ And we reported that to President Trump because that’s quite unusual. And he wasn’t winging it, he was well prepared. And so I was impressed with that and I felt that bolstered the Chinese commitment. I may be wrong, but I believe it did.”
According to Kudlow, Xi Jinping actually did the bidding directly. White House National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro was also present and echoed this account.
Peter Navarro（White House National Trade Council Director）: “It was extraordinary to have the president of China himself at that dinner spend the first 30 to 45 minutes laying out the parameters in detail of a deal — that’s never really happened in the history of the U.S.-China relationship. The way this generally works is that the minions meet and talk about these things. This was president-to-president, so that’s very much different as well.”
According to the American team, not only was substantial ground covered in the meeting, but the Chinese team used an important word: “immediately.”
Larry Kudlow: “The other point I want to make is, when we met with Vice Premier Liu He, he said several times — and I pushed him on this — that the China changes, with respect to tariffs and non-tariff barriers and other structural issues that we’ll get into in a few moments, would begin immediately. I don’t think that’s come out yet in the press reports. I did mention that in some of the interviews that I did this morning, ‘immediately’. And I said, ‘What do you mean, “immediately”?’ And he said, ‘Immediately’. I said, ‘Like Monday? Get going, Monday? That would be very persuasive.’ And, I said that to his top deputies. So we’ll see. But, I think, I can tell you I’ve never heard that ‘immediately’ commitment before.”
China’s official Xinhua News agency agreed with its counterpart in describing a friendly and constructive atmosphere. But in terms of what was actually talked about and agreed upon, it depicts a different picture.
According to Beijing, the U.S. and China agreed to stop adding new tariffs, without mentioning it’s only a temporary cease fire. The report said the next step is to work to eliminate all tariffs. There is no mention of the 90 day negotiation period and what happens if the two parties don’t reach an agreement within three months. Xinhua also said China will further open its market and increase imports based on the needs of China’s reforms and the Chinese market. The report didn’t mention the immediate purchase of large amounts of U.S. agricultural goods. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s press briefing was strictly in line with the Xinhua News agency’s report. In a response to mounting criticism from Chinese citizens that the media concealed important details of the Trump-Xi meeting, chief editor Hu Xijin of China’s Global Times defended the Chinese government. He said it is normal for diplomats to highlight information that is beneficial to their country. He went on to say his media did not hide such information.The Global Times also criticized the Trump administration for highlighting Beijing’s agreement to purchase $1.2 trillion dollars of American goods while failing to mention where the U.S. made concessions. It listed examples, like the U.S. hasn’t mentioned Made in China 2025 for a while. It also seemed to stop attacks on China’s state-owned enterprises and related industrial policies.
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：《环球时报》现在处于一个很尴尬的境地。即使它想做一些与新华社不一样的事情，不得已还得攻击美国，可能这种细微的差别也是中共上层的授意。真正的问题是：究竟为什么中共认为有必要隐瞒川-习会的细节呢？以下是我和政治评论家陈破空先生的探讨。
The Global Times is in an awkward position. It still has to attack America even if it wants to somewhat differ from Xinhua. It is likely this slight difference was also ordered by the regime. The real question is why did the Chinese Communist Party feel the need to hide the details of this meeting at all? Here is my discussion with Chinese political strategist Pokong Chen.
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“您觉得为什么中共要对国内隐瞒川-习会的谈判内容呢？”
“In your opinion, why did the Chinese communist regime hide part of the Trump-Xi meeting from its people?”
“ The regime orchestrated this, as I had anticipated. Simply because this is almost the last chance for it to warm up China-U.S. relations and end confrontation between them. This is also the last reprieve President Trump and the U.S. have granted him after Xi’s repeated requests. So, evidently, it was China that made substantial concessions to the U.S. You may call it caving in, admitting defeat, or a signal of sincerity. It was flagged as‘surrender’, in accounts of Russian and Indian media. That’s why the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), who had been so assertive and high-profile, was reluctant to publicize the truth. We remember Xi’s previous public remarks, claiming to ‘fight to the end’, ‘teeth for teeth’, and‘never back down a single step’. He even swore to prevent Trump from taking advantage of China like cutting off mutton from a grown sheep. So defiantly, so absolutely. Despite such statements Xi’s huge concessions made him unable to face the Chinese people, which may provoke civilian criticism, political unrest or a power crisis. As a result Xi Jinping and the Chinese communist regime concealed details of the talk. ”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“根据Navarro的描述，在川-习会上，习近平一上来就做了大段讲话，作出了重大让步。 您觉得他为什么要这样做？中共政权在和美国的贸易战中，现在到底处于什么状态？”
“Xi started the talk with a lengthy speech, offering great concessions, according to Navarro. Why did he do so? How is the Chinese communist regime doing amid the ongoing trade war? ”
“The Chinese regime repeatedly employed a delaying tactic. Soon after Trump took office they staged a “100-day negotiation,” which ended up in failure due to the CCP’s delay. Later Vice Premier Liu He came to the U.S. for another rounds of talks. But no good faith had been found on the part of the Chinese regime. Then the U.S. laid aside the negotiations. China didn’t ask the U.S. to resume the talks until its economy dropped to a dangerous point with the escalating trade war. However, Trump declared more than once that he wouldn’t restart the negotiations so soon, saying that China was not ready to reach a deal. The U.S. didn’t agree to launch this meeting until many promises, even from Xi himself, were made. So the spotlight of this talk was the fact that Xi spent 30 minutes elaborating his concessions to the U.S. team at the very start of the summit. This was done for two reasons. One, Xi almost lost his reputation for the U.S. part. Back in 2015, Xi made two promises to then-American President Obama: one, the South China Sea would never become militarized, but China ate its words later; two, China’s cyber theft targeted at American businesses would be stopped, which turned out to be more alarming than ever. Therefore, Xi lost (or nearly lost) his credibility in the U.S. Further, the past two years’ interactions with the Xi administration taught the U.S. counterpart that the barrier to Sino-U.S. talks or ties was no other than Xi himself. Both Mr. Kudlow, the director of the national economic council, and President Trump showed that Liu He and others consented to a deal, but finally Xi stood in the way. So this time, Xi Jinping himself had to stand out and air his own statements and commitments. Otherwise this meeting would be impossible. Moreover, this posture unmistakably signaled that Xi has the authority of giving a final say. Only by doing so could Xi gain his credibility from the U.S. Again, the last chance for him. There are three reasons for his willingness to back down. First, China is the inflicting party, with the U.S. being the victim, thereby accounting for Xi’s concessions. Secondly, compared with American democracy, Xi’s domination in a party state like China paved his way to concessions, whose authority can stifle dissent either from the CCP or from the Chinese society. Thirdly, China feels like it’s economically breaking down since its economy has been going downward while the American economy is improving. If market transfers and manufacturing collapse occurs, China’s whole economy will be shaken. As a result, Xi Jinping had to offer sweeping concessions.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：我还邀请安一鸣谈了对川-习会的看法。他是南加州大学马歇尔商学院的助理教授。曾与纳瓦罗合著《致命中国》一书。
I also asked Greg Autry his opinion on the summit. Mr. Autry is assistant Professor of Clinical Entrepreneurship at the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California. He also co-wrote the book《Death by China》.
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“关于川-习会，一些分析人士称川普被习近平愚弄了。习近平不会真的做出实质性让步。相反，他们只是欺骗美国，以便争取时间，想出一些新招术维持现状，就像他们对付前几届美国政府一样。您认为川普会被习近平再次愚弄、操纵吗？”
“ Simone Gao: Regarding the Trump-Xi summit, some analysts say Trump was fooled by Xi Jinping. Xi will not really make substantial concessions. Instead, they will just trick the U.S. in order to buy some time to come up with new ways to maintain the status quo, just like what they did with previous administrations. Do you think Trump will be fooled and manipulated again by Xi Jinping?”
Greg Autry:“ I don’t think that Donald Trump is easily fooled. I do think, however, the expectations of the United States’ government as a whole and the financial interests that go beyond the government, and particularly, multinational corporations and investors want to see some sort of negotiation and agreement, so there was a great deal of pressure on Trump and the Trump team to at least appear that they were open to doing so. So as long as Xi said some of the right things, I think that they were required to give China, frankly, a little more leash. And we’re just going to have to just wait and find out, of course, that those promises made by Xi are false, which they always are. But, unfortunately, I think the president was in a situation where he couldn’t look like that bad guy. He had to let Xi, one more time, make a false promise. And I think the fact that Trump set a very tight deadline on it of 90 days before he upped the tariffs, and that deadline starts, not on January 1st, but it starts right now, makes it clear to me that they don’t intend to mess around with this for very long.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“您最近在《外交政策》杂志上发表了一篇文章，文中写道，‘两年来，权威专家已经不再大谈、特谈中国会不可避免地迈向资本主义、迈向民主国家之类的废话了，而是在发问：对一个我们都认为是建立在谎言和欺骗基础上的危险政权，关税是否是与之对抗的正确策略。’这个怎么理解？您认为川普的成功仅仅是基于贸易吗？说得再具体一点，关税是川普可用的唯一的工具，还是最好的工具？”
“ In your recent article in Foreign Policy, you wrote, “Over the last two years, establishment pundits shifted from spouting nonsense about China’s inevitable progress toward capitalism and democracy to asking whether tariffs are the right way to confront a dangerous regime we all agree is built on lies and cheating.” So what about that? Do you think Trump has pinned his success on trade alone, more specifically, are tariffs the only tool or the best tool at Trump’s disposal?”
Greg Autry:“ I think that of all of Trump’s policies, his trade policy has been the most effective. U.S. unemployment rate is at a record low. GDP growth is exceptionally high. People on the street are happy with economic performance, and just the opposite is happening in China. So he’s achieved what he wanted, which was leverage over the Chinese leadership in an economic realm using the tariffs. That said, that’s not the only tool that would be available to the administration if they wanted to pursue this further. One of the things they could do would be look at visas for Chinese executives and Chinese students. The recent arrest of a Huawei executive says to me that they’re looking very seriously at the actual behavior of individuals involved in the intellectual property theft and transfer and threats to U.S. national security. It’s also quite reasonable to assume that the U.S. will begin looking at reciprocal laws. So if Chinese organizations want to come to the U.S., they’d be forced into joint partnerships very similar to the way that U.S. companies are forced into joint partnerships often with Chinese state-owned enterprises in order to do business in the Chinese market. We could also force Chinese companies to transfer technology in order to have access to our market the same way that the Chinese government has done. And if they don’t have any technology, perhaps we could charge a market access fee where they need to essentially pay for us to develop technology if they’re going to come into our market. The fact that U.S. companies and individuals can’t really own property in China, and yet Chinese companies have been allowed to come into the U.S. and buy up real property and large swaths of land and mineral resources, which are not available to U.S. firms operating in China, we should level those rules out and prevent Chinese access to real estate, to land, and to mineral resources.”
Coming up, besides Trump, what else caused Beijing to make concessions?
Part two: Do Americans Trust Chinese State-owned Media More than the White House?
Leading up to the Trump-Xi summit, the stock market showed confidence until December 4th, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average suddenly fell nearly 800 points. Bond yields also plummeted. The Washington Post attributed the market downturn to the differing U.S. and China accounts from the G20 summit. The Post challenged some of Trump’s claims, saying they could not be confirmed by officials from the administration. It also quoted an anonymous former official criticizing Trump, saying, quote, “You don’t do this with the Chinese. You don’t triumphantly proclaim all their concessions in public. It’s just madness.”
MSNBC’s headline was more blunt: “Trump’s incredible deal’ with China doesn’t appear to exist.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）： 这一大堆的报导让我好奇，是不是白宫和中国的国有媒体的看法不一致？美国民众是不是信赖中国媒体更多？我问了安一鸣先生是不是这样。
The slew of reports made me wonder if there were discrepancies in the accounts between the White House and Chinese state-owned media. Does the American public believe the Chinese media more? I asked Mr. Autry whether they do or not.
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“12月5日，道琼斯指数下跌了将近800点。华盛顿邮报暗示说下跌是由于美中到川-习会的矛盾报导导致的。我的问题是：如果美中两边的说法确实不一样，美国民众是不是更倾向于相信中国的说法？不然的话， 为什么股市会下跌？”
“December 5 , the Dow fell nearly 800 points. The Washington Post suggested it dropped because of the contradicting reports from China and the U.S. My question is this: If there are discrepancies in the description between the two sides, are the American people really inclined to believe the Chinese side? Otherwise, why did the stock market fall?”
Greg Autry: “So the Chinese have a much better perception management campaign, the Communist Party has the best global propaganda system in the world. And they’re very good at making their message be felt. And, frankly, most American multinational corporations are more aligned with the Chinese interests. That’s where most of their jobs are and their products are produced. And most American investment bankers and finance folks that get quoted in the media or make donations to D.C. think tanks that produce the dominant paradigm that ends up in the financial media, these folks are all aligned with the Chinese side, and they take their messaging right from the Communist Party, and they repeat it. And that’s easy to do, and the American public is used to that and comfortable with that, in fact. But don’t assume that because you see that Dow fall significantly or the bond market adjust that that’s the American public. Most of the American public are not active traders of equities. And the ones that are, as individuals, that’s a very small amount of the market. When the market moves, it’s because investment bankers and financial professionals who are aligned with the Chinese side of things are unhappy. And so I think they’ve realized that this isn’t going to happen. And so they’ve pulled back a bit, and that shouldn’t be a surprise.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“说起美国经济，很多投资人，包括高盛，预测美国经济明年衰退。你怎么看？”
“ Talking about the U.S. economy, a number of investors, including Goldman Sachs, predicted a U.S. recession next year. What do you think?”
Greg Autry: “Well, first of all, we’ve got to realize we’ve had a ten-year growth spurt, so having a recession next year would not be a surprise. There are certainly a number of indicators that many of the markets, including the real estate and equity markets, are, as we say, long in the tooth, meaning that they’ve grown for so long that a correction is to be expected. So I don’t know that that won’t happen. The yield curve and other indicators suggest that it’s entirely possible. I would hope the Federal Reserve would stop raising interest rates at this point because that has helped move us to that position. But we’re in a really strong position and, if we underwent any normal recession, it wouldn’t be a significant problem. The problem with Goldman Sachs and most of the investment banks that control a lot of the financial media opinions, their interest is only in what happens next quarter and returning short-term profits because the analysts and traders at those companies retire early, and the CEOs did help back the multinational corporations. They’re only, on average, a CEO for five years. So they want short-term results. They don’t care about the long-term interests of the United States, the long-term interests of workers, our national security, or any of those other things. And Donald Trump understands that, and I don’t think he’s going to take their opinions more seriously than any of the other stakeholders he represents.”
Coming up, what’s happened since the summit?
Part Three: Moves by the U.S. and Beijing After the Summit.
On December 1st, the same day President Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, agreed to a trade war truce, Canada arrested the chief financial officer of China’s Huawei Technologies, Meng Wanzhou. Meng is the deputy chair of Huawei’s board and the daughter of the company’s founder, Ren Zhengfei. The arrest warrant was issued by the United States a week earlier. A Canadian justice then issued a warrant on November 30th. Meng allegedly committed fraud in 2013 by lying to U.S. financial institutions about Huawei’s connection with Hong Kong company SkyCom, which reportedly sold U.S. goods to Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions. Huawei is the world’s largest maker of telecommunications network equipment. In 2004, CISCO sued Huawei for using stolen Cisco technology to develop a lineup of routers and switches sold in competition to the American company. Cisco later dropped the lawsuit in exchange for a promise from its rival to modify its product lineup.
On the same day, President Trump tweeted, quote, “Very strong signals being sent by China once they returned home from their long trip, including stops, from Argentina. Not to sound naive or anything, but I believe President Xi meant every word of what he said at our long and hopefully historic meeting. ALL subjects discussed!”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：请安一鸣和陈破空为我们解读川普总统的对华（共）态度，并展望美-中（共）贸易战的前景。
What does all this say about the U.S.-China trade war and President Trump’s attitude toward China now? Let’s hear form Greg Autry and Pokong Chen again.
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“十二月一日，华为的CFO，也是创始人的女儿，孟晚舟在加拿大被捕。美国要求引渡她。你怎么看这个事情？你认为这件事和贸易战有关系吗？”
“ On December 1st, Meng Wanzhou, Huawei C.F.O. and daughter of the founder of the company, was arrested in Canada for extradition to the U.S. What do you make of her arrest? Do you think it is related to the U.S.-China trade war?”
Greg Autry: “Absolutely. It, to some extent, couldn’t not be because the focus on the penalties that the U.S. is putting on China are not necessarily over the specific products on the list, but over the intellectual property theft and behavior that requires the transfer of intellectual property. And Huawei is like the poster child for stealing U.S. intellectual property and as a tool for the Chinese party to insert network infrastructure and communications infrastructure into Western countries that it can further use to inflict cyber espionage and industrial espionage on those countries. So it’s the perfect message to send. I don’t know whether the arrest was intentionally related to that, but Huawei has been a company that I identified back in 2013 when I testified to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on China cyber espionage as the primary target to look at. So I’m not surprised by that.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：“所以你认为这不是巧合？这反映了川普对中国的态度？”
“ So you think this is not a coincidence? It says something about trump’s attitude towards China?”
Greg Autry:“ I think it’s possible. And, again, I think you might see that they take action on visas for corporate executives or maybe even for students or, who knows, because they’ve got a lot of other tools in their pocket and they don’t intend to let a foreign power continue to steal U.S. assets. And I think they’re going to be pretty strong about that. And tariffs are not the only way to do it. So if they put the tariffs on hold, like I said, they could look at those reciprocal rules, they could look at all these other issues.”
萧茗（Host/ Simone Gao）：在之前，人们都认为共产中国和习近平不可能做出结构性改变，因为这会改变中共如何运作经济，如何运作国家，也就是中共如何保住权力。所以改变这些会要求某种形式的政治改革，这一直是中共不可打破的底线。同意做出结构性改变的话，习近平和中共是不是真的愿意放弃底线？现在这么想还太早了。只有一个办法能找到答案，就是时间。请您继续关注我们的节目，看川普是不是在美中贸易战中会大获全胜。感谢收看，我是萧茗。您也可以关注我们的脸书或是Youtube频道。下次节目再见。
Before, there was an understanding that communist China and Xi Jinping are unable to make structural changes because it would change how the Communist Party runs the economy, how it runs the country, and basically how it stays in power. So changing these would require political reform of some sort, which has always been its bottom line that can’t be broken. So by agreeing to these structural changes, will Xi Jinping and the communist regime really be giving up their bottom line? It is still hard to believe at this point. There is only one way to find out: time. So stay tuned to find out if Trump really will hit a homerun in the U.S.-China trade war. Thanks for watching. I am Simone Gao. Please like our Facebook page and subscribe to our YouTube channel at 《Zooming In with Simone Gao》. See you next time.
Editors：Julian Kuo Bonnie Yu Frank Lin Bin Tang York Du
Narrator: Rich Crankshaw
Interview Overdub: Kacey Cox
Transcription: Jess Beatty
Translation：Greg Yang, Frank Yue Xiaofeng Zhang Juan Li
Cameraman：York Du Wu Wei Eric Zhang
Special Effects：Harrison Sun
Assistant producer： Bin Tang Merry Jiang
Host accessories are sponsored by Yun Boutique
New Tang Dynasty Television
December , 2018