Roger Stone is the latest Trump ally found guilty of lying to Congress and obstructing the investigation into Russia's 2016 election interference. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON Roger Stone,an ally of President Donald Trump, was found guilty Friday of lying to Congress and obstructing an investigation into Russia to protect Trumpand his presidential campaign.

The jury's verdict came after about eight hours of deliberation.Stone, a fixture in GOP politicswho worked on campaigns stretching back to Richard Nixon's, now faces the possibility of prison.

He's the latest Trump ally to be found guilty in cases sproutingfrom aspecial counsel's investigation intoRussia's interference in the 2016 election.

The verdict, reached by a jury of nine women and three men, comes amid an impeachment inquiry into allegations that Trump sought to pressureUkraine into investigating a political rival.

Witnesses testified in closed-door sessions on Capitol Hill that the White House dangled critical military aid and an official visit in orderto get Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, a front-runner forthe Democratic presidential nomination.Those hearings went public this week, when witnesses testifiedWednesday and Friday.

Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and helped Donald Trump win. We look back at history and ask: Will they do it again? Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

Impeachment hearing: Ambassador Yovanovitch says Trump's attacks on her 'intimidating'

As the verdicts were read, Stone stood expressionlesswithhis hands in his pockets.

Shortly after, a petition started to circulate calling for Trump to pardon Stone.

Trump took to Twitter, decrying a "double standard"and saidlaw enforcement officials lied, including Robert Mueller, the special counsel who headed the Russia investigation.

Stone's trial ends aftera week marked with Nixon quotes, references to the Mafia movie "The Godfather" and a colorful witness who offered to do a Bernie Sanders impression before an unamused federal judge. The proceedings attracted the attendance of controversial figures, including alt-right firebrands Milo Yiannopoulos and Jacob Wohl.

Michael Caputo, a former Trump campaign adviser who attended the trial, said he was escorted out of the courtroom by a federal marshal for turning his back on the jurors as they walked out.

"Normal Americans dont stand a chance with an Obama judge and a Washington jury," he tweeted.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson allowed Stone to go home as he awaits his sentencing, scheduled forFeb. 6. A gag order preventing him from talking about the case remains in effect.He and his attorneys did not comment as they left the courthouse.

Theproceedings revealed information aboutthe Trump campaign's efforts to seek advance knowledge ofemails stolen from the Democratic National Committee, which hurt Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton when Trump was trailing in the polls. Testimonyindicatedthese efforts involved the candidate himself.

Analysis: As public impeachment hearings open, the surprise was that there was a surprise

Stone, 67,stood trial on accusations that he repeatedly lied to Congress about his back-channel efforts to push for the release of those emails. Hewas accused of urging a possible congressional witness to either lie or scuttle his testimony.

"Roger Stone lied because the truth looked bad for the Trump campaign and the truth looked bad for Donald Trump," Assistant U.S. Attorney AaronZelinsky told jurors.

Defense attorneys urged jurors to focus on Stone's state of mind, arguing he did not willfully mislead Congress.The claim that Stone lied to protect the Trump campaign was "absolutely false," Bruce Rogow told jurors.

"It makes no sense," Rogow said, adding that the campaign was long over and Trump was already president when Stone testified before Congress in 2017. "Why would Stone lie, why would he make stuff up? ... There is no purpose, there is no reason, there is no motive."

Stone was found guilty of seven charges:one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering. The maximum penalty for all counts totals 50 years in prison, though first-time offenders generally receive significantly lower sentences.

Jurors heard from five government witnesses and saw dozens of emails and text messages that prosecutors said provedStone lied. His defense attorneysdid not call any witnesses, and Stone, known for his flamboyance and combativeness, did not testify.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Roger Stone:Prosecution says he lied to Congress to protect Trump; defense says there was no motive

Defense attorneys sought to poke holes in the government's case by casting the emails and text messages as statements that, while at times crude,lacked any "malignant" context.

The charges stemmed from Stone's interactions with the Trump campaign in the summer of 2016, around the time that WikiLeaks, an anti-secrecy group, began publishing troves of damaging emails about the Democratic National Committee andClinton.

Prosecutors said Stone lied to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to push for the release of those emails. They said he lied about the identity of the person who tipped him off about WikiLeaks' plans his so-called intermediary. They said he falselydenied talking to the Trump campaign about what he learnedand falsely told Congress he did not have text messages and emails in which he talked about WikiLeaks.

Prosecutors said Stone sought to silence a witness who could expose these lies by using threatening references from "The Godfather" movie. Stone urged the witness in multiple emails to follow the steps of Frank Pentangeli, a character in "The Godfather II" who lied to Congress to avoid incriminating Mafia boss Michael Corleone.

Defense attorneys sought to discredit that witness, a comedian and radio host whoStone told the House committeewas his intermediary to WikiLeaks. They said Randy Credico, who said he was never the conduitto the group,"played" Stone and made him believe he hadback-channel capabilities with WikiLeaks.

Movie nights, baseball, phone calls: How Trump is uniting the GOP to fight impeachment

Rick Gates, another former campaign official, testified that he overheard then-candidate Trump talking to Stone on the phone in July 2016, shortly after WikiLeaks began publishing the DNC emails. "More information is coming," Trump told Gates after hanging up, according to testimony.In written responses to Mueller, Trump saidhe did not recall being told about discussions of the hacked emails.

Steve Bannon, the campaign's former chief executive, testified that he and other members of the campaign saw Stone as their "access point" to WikiLeaks.

Steve Bannon, who served as chief executive of Donald Trump's presidential campaign, told jurors Friday he saw Roger Stone as "an access point" to WikiLeaks, which later released hacked emails damaging to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. (Nov. 8) AP

Defense attorneys said testimonydidn't point to a crime. Seeking information that would hurt the opposing party is a staple in political campaigns, they argued. Rogowpointed out that Gates, who was charged in the Mueller probe, cooperatedwith prosecutors to avoid prison time.

In all, six Trump allies and former campaign aideshave beenconvicted since 2017 as part of Mueller's Russia investigation.

Gates, whopleaded guilty to lying to investigators,awaitssentencing.

Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, is serving more than seven years in prison after he was convicted ofseveral charges, including defrauding banks and taxpayers out of millions of dollars amassed through illicit lobbying.

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements to investigators about his contacts with a Russian ambassador. He has yet to be sentenced.

Michael Cohen, Trump's former personal attorney, is serving three years in prison after admitting he lied to Congress about plans to build a Trump Tower in Russia. Cohen admitted he was involved in schemes to buy the silence of two women who claimed to have had sexual relationships with Trump.

Former campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, who is running for Congress, served a two-week prison sentenceafter admitting he lied to investigators about his contacts with Russians.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/15/roger-stone-jurors-deliver-verdict-trump-ally-trial-over-wikileaks/4187429002/

Here is the original post:
Roger Stone found guilty of lying to Congress to protect Trump and his campaign - USA TODAY

The Swedish Prosecution Authority said Monday it will provide an update with new information this week on a probe into a 2010 rape allegation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

The investigation concerns events which took place in August 2010 after a Swedish woman met the Australian at a WikiLeaks conference in Stockholm.

Assange has always denied the allegation.

In a statement, the prosecution agency said it was planning a press conference on Tuesday at 1300 GMT when the prosecutor will give a briefing on the investigative measures taken and provide new information.

READ ALSO:Man remanded for killing own mother in Ebonyi

The 48-year-old has been held at a top-security British prison since April after police dragged him out of the Ecuadoran embassy in London, where he had been holed up since 2012 to avoid an extradition order to Sweden.

Assange was subsequently sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for breaching bail conditions when he took refuge in the embassy.

Following his arrest, Swedish authorities reopened their 2010 rape investigation, which had been closed in 2017 on the argument it was not possible to proceed with the probe as Assange could not be reached.

In September, prosecutors said they had interviewed seven witnesses over the summer and that Assange was suspected of rape.

Swedish deputy director of public prosecutions Eva-Marie Persson in charge of the investigation also said the material from the interviews was to be analysed further before she decided on how to proceed.

Assange is currently also the subject of a US extradition request to face charges relating to obtaining and disseminating classified information over the publishing of military documents and diplomatic cables through the WikiLeaks website.

Since his April arrest, questions regarding Assanges health have been raised, with him appearing frail and confused at court hearings.

Die in jail Earlier in November, John Shipton, Assanges father warned that his son may die in jail.

His comments followed a warning from the UNs Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, who said that the treatment of Assange was putting his life at-risk.

Swedish judge Nils Petter Ekdahl told AFP that the prosecutor has a duty to try and bring a suspect to justice if the evidence warrants it.

If you believe there is enough evidence for a conviction, even in an old case, the principal rule is to charge the person, Ekdahl said.

Ekdahl added that the prosecutor can under certain circumstances make exceptions to this rule. It could, for instance, be decided that even if a conviction is likely the sentence would probably be lenient owing to Assanges poor health and therefore decide not to pursue the case.

The statute of limitations in the case expires in August 2020.

(AFP)

DOWNLOAD THE PUNCH NEWS APP NOW ON

More:
WikiLeaks: Sweden to give new information on Assange rape probe - The Punch

A top aide to Donald Trump's 2016 campaign revealed new details in court testimony Tuesday about Trump's reaction to dumps of information from WikiLeaks at key moments in the race.

Former deputy campaign chair Rick Gates testified that he was riding in a Chevy Suburban from LaGuardia Airport in New York in mid-2016 when Trump took a late-evening phone call from his longtime associate Roger Stone, where the pair apparently discussed WikiLeaks' planned release of hacked Democratic emails.

"After Mr. Trump got off the phone with Mr. Stone, what did Mr. Trump say?" prosecutor Aaron Zelinsky asked Gates. "He indicated more information would be coming," Gates responded, in testimony at Stone's criminal trial in Washington.

Gates said two secret service agents also witnessed the call. The call happened days after WikiLeaks' first release on July 22, 2016, of emails the Russian military hacked from the Democratic National Committee.

"For months, information had been talked about" in the campaign prior to the July 22 drop of emails, Gates said Tuesday. "The campaign was in a state of happiness" in the wake of the July release.

His testimony flies in the face of repeated denials by both Stone and Trump that they had ever discussed WikiLeaks. Trump said he did not "recall" any conversations in written answers to special counsel Robert Mueller, and also told Mueller that he first learned about the hacked emails "at or shortly after the time it became the subject of media reporting."

The revelation is among the details that's been withheld from the public in Mueller's final report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. When the report was released in May, the Justice Department redacted key portions about Trump's reaction to the WikiLeaks releases because the information was related to Stone's trial. This was a routine move, but it blunted the impact of some damaging allegations against Trump and how his campaign knowingly benefitted from Russian meddling.

Gates' reveal of what Trump said to him after speaking with Stone puts in even sharper relief how much Trump himself knew about how the Russian hack and release of Democratic emails could help his campaign.

According to the Mueller report, Gates previously told investigators that the Trump campaign "was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging" based on potential WikiLeaks releases. In the final stretch of the 2016 campaign, Trump made near-daily references to WikiLeaks at his rallies, sometimes reading directly from the messages and latching onto theories that were being simultaneously promoted by Kremlin-controlled news outlets.

Prosecutors haven't filled in details on whether Stone got confidential information from WikiLeaks through a supposed backchannel. Stone is accused of lying to Congress about what he discussed with the campaign regarding WikiLeaks and about the supposed backchannel, among other charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

Gates was one of the most significant witnesses of the Mueller investigation and has continued to be a key witness in cases prosecutors have pursued. Tuesday marked the third time Gates has testified at a criminal trial, but the first time he is speaking to a jury about interactions with Trump.

Gates pleaded guilty last year to two crimes and has cooperated with prosecutors in exchange for what he hopes will be a lenient sentence. His cooperation is winding down after nearly two years -- Gates' lawyers and the Justice Department told a judge on Monday that his case will be ready for sentencing, which could happen as soon as next month.

Read more here:
Former aide: Trump campaign reaction to 2016 WikiLeaks dump was 'a state of happiness' - WPTV.com

Former Trump campaign advisor Roger Stone professed innocence and sought legal funds after being charged in the Russia probe with lying, witness tampering and obstruction in connection with the 2016 presidential election. (Jan. 31) AP

WASHINGTON As an impeachment inquiry that threatens Donald Trump's presidency gains steam in the U.S. Capitol, jurors in a trial happening just across the street will soon decide if Roger Stone, the president's ally, lied to Congress to help and protect him.

Jurors will start deliberating Thursday after hearing testimonies over the past week. A guilty verdict could send the longtime GOP operative to prison and will make him the latest Trump ally to be convicted of a crime as a result of the special counsel investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. An acquittal could reinforce Trump and his allies'longstanding claim that the Russia probewas a "witch hunt" meant to hurt him politically.

During closing arguments Wednesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Kravis told jurors that Stone obstructed a congressional investigation to help Trump and his campaign. Stone liedto lawmakers repeatedly, depriving them of evidence they needed as they pursued their own investigation into Russia and possible ties to the Trump campaign, Kravis said in a packed federal courtroom.

"A person who is acting in good faith would not say and do the things that Roger Stone said and did ... It shows you exactly what was in his head all along: to obstruct the committees investigation," Kravis told jurors.

Trump: Trump says he's 'too busy' to watch impeachment inquiry hearing, but he's tweeting about it

Defense attorney Bruce Rogowsaid the government's assertion that Stone lied to protect the Trump campaign is "absolutely false."

"It makes no sense," Rogow told jurors, adding that the campaign was long over and Trump was already president when Stone testified before Congress in 2017. "Why would Stone lie, why would he make stuff up? ... There is no purpose, there is no reason, there is no motive."

Stonefaces seven charges: one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering.

The allegations stem from Stone's interactions with the Trump campaign in the summer of 2016, around the time that WikiLeaks, an anti-secrecy group, began publishing troves of damaging emails about the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton, Trump's presidential rival.

Prosecutors said Stone, a fixture in GOP politics known for his flamboyance and combativeness, lied to the House Intelligence Committee about his back-channel efforts to push for the release of those emails. They saidStone lied about the identity of the person who first tipped him off about WikiLeaks' plans. They said Stone denied that he passedon what he learned to the Trump campaign. And they said Stonedenied the existence of text messages and emails in which he talked about WikiLeaks.

"After he told these lies, Stone engaged in a relentless campaign to silence the person who could expose the lies," Kravis told jurors.

Steve Bannon: Trump campaign saw Roger Stone as its 'access point' to WikiLeaks

The trial presented the first clear pictureof how the Trump campaign sought to learn about WikiLeaks' plans to publish emails that would hurt Clinton and help Trump. Testimonies from government witnesses portrayedthe campaign as an eager beneficiary of WikiLeaks' email dumps, and Stone as the conduit who boasted about his connections to the group.

Prosecutors presented jurors with dozens of emails and text messages many with crude language showing Stone communicating with senior members of the Trump campaign about WikiLeaks and threatening a possible congressional witness. They displayed charts showing the numbers of phone calls Stone had with the campaign, including with the candidate himself, around the time DNC emails were released.

Steve Bannon, the campaign's former chief executive, testified that the campaign saw Stone as its "access point" to WikiLeaks.

Rick Gates, another former campaign official, testified about a phone call between Stone and Trump in July 2016, shortly after WikiLeaks began publishing DNC emails. Gates said he was in the car with Trump when he heard him talking to Stone. After Trump hung up, he told Gates, "More information is coming." Trump told former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigators that he did not recall being told that Stone or anyone in his campaign discussed the release of hacked emails.

Randy Credico, a comedian and radio host Stone claimed was the person who told him about WikiLeaks' plans, testified that he was never the backchannel to the group. Prosecutors said Stone invoked Mafia references from "The Godfather"to urge Credico to either lie or not testify before Congress.

'5 categories of lies': Prosecutors tie Roger Stone's alleged crimes to Trump and his campaign

Defense attorneys sought to discredit Credico,telling jurors that he "played" Stone and made him believe he hadback-channel capabilities with WikiLeaks. "Theres no question that Randy Credico mislead Roger Stone," Rogow told jurors.

Rogow said prosecutors are asking jurors to draw inferences from emails and text messages that lacked context and did not show anything "illegal" or"malignant." And while Stone and Trump talked on the phone multiple times in the summer of 2016, there's no evidence on what the two talked about.

"How can you draw an inference ... when you have no idea on what was said in these calls?" Rogow said.

Rogow also said the government's case relied on actions that are not criminal.

"There was nothing illegal about the campaign being interested in what WikiLeaks was going to be sending out This is what happens in campaigns. They look for opposition information," Rogow told jurors."In fact, so much of this case deals with that question that you need to ask, 'So what?'"

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Marando took offense in that assertion.

"Well if thats the state of affairs that were in, Im pretty shocked. Truth matters. Truth still matters," Marando told jurors. "We live in a world nowadays with Twitter, tweets, social media, where you can find any view, any political view you want. You can find your own truth."

Stone lied to obstruct an investigation and tampered with a witness, Marando repeated."That matters, and you don't look at that and say, 'So what?'"

Stone's trial attracted conservative figures, such as Milo Yiannopoulos, the controversial, far-right provocateur, and Michael Caputo, a former Trump campaign adviser.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/13/roger-stone-trump-allys-trial-over-russia-wikileaks-concludes/2581039001/

See more here:
Prosecution says Roger Stone lied to Congress to protect Trump; defense says there was no motive - USA TODAY

Members of the media gather outside Westminster Magistrates Court, where WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was due to face a trial after he was arrested in London, 11 April 2019. (Photo: Andy Rain/EPA-EFE)

It can also be revealed that Lady Arbuthnot has received gifts and hospitality in relation to her husband, including from a military and cybersecurity company exposed by WikiLeaks. These activities indicate that the chief magistrates activities cannot be considered as entirely separate from her husbands.

Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom, a former defence minister, is a paid chair of the advisory board of military corporation Thales Group, and was until earlier this year an adviser to arms company Babcock International. Both companies have major contracts with the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD).

The revelations highlight concerns about conflicts of interest. Lady Arbuthnot began presiding over Assanges legal case in 2017 and ruled this June that a full hearing would begin next February to consider the request for extradition from the UK made by the Trump administration.

British judges are required to declare any potential conflicts of interests to the courts, but it is our understanding that Lady Arbuthnot has not done so.

Lady Arbuthnot has recently appointed a district judge to rule on Assanges extradition case, but remains the supervising legal figure in the process. According to the UK courts service, the chief magistrate is responsible for supporting and guiding district judge colleagues.

Assange is currently being held in Belmarsh maximum security prison in London in conditions described by UN special rapporteur on torture, Nils Meltzer, as psychological torture. If transferred to the US, Assange faces life in prison on espionage charges.

Lady Arbuthnot financially benefited from organisations exposed by WikiLeaks

At a time when Lady Arbuthnot was in her former position as a district judge in Westminster, she personally benefited from funding together with her husband from two sources which were exposed by WikiLeaks in its document releases.

The British parliaments register of interests shows that in October 2014, Lady Arbuthnot was provided with tickets worth 1,250 to the Chelsea Flower Show in London along with her husband. The tickets were provided by Bechtel Management Company Ltd, part of the major US military corporation, Bechtel, whose contracts with the UKs Ministry of Defence include a project worth up to 215m to transform its Defence Equipment & Support Organisation, the body that buys and supports all the equipment used by the British armed forces.

Another of Bechtels business lines is industrial cybersecurity, a term which is often a euphemism for cyber warfare and surveillance technology.

WikiLeaks releases on Bechtel have shown the companys close connections to US foreign policy. Cables published in 2011, for example, show that the US ambassador to Egypt, Margaret Scobey, pressured the Ministry of Electricity and Power to award a tender for technical consultancy and design of Egypts first nuclear plant to Bechtel.

In another personal benefit declared to parliament, Lady Arbuthnot, again together with her husband, had flights and expenses worth 2,426 paid for a visit to Istanbul in November 2014. This was to promote and further bilateral relations between Britain and Turkey at a high level, according to Lord Arbuthnots declaration to the register of interests.

These expenses were paid by the British-Turkish Tatlidil, a forum established in 2011 during the visit to London of Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoan and announced with then prime minister David Cameron. Tatlidil describes its objectives as facilitating and strengthen [sic] relations between the Republic of Turkey and the United Kingdom at the level of government, diplomacy, business, academia and media.

Its main role is to hold an annual two-day conference which is attended by the president of Turkey, and Turkish and British ministers. Lord Arbuthnot also attended the Tatlidil in Wokingham, a town just outside London, in May 2018.

As subjects of unwanted leaks, both Bechtel and Tatlidil have reason to oppose the work of Assange and WikiLeaks. Although the payments were entered into the parliamentary register of interests, the parties in the court case were not informed about them. Although Assanges trial has attracted significant criticism around the world, Lady Arbuthnot did not consider it necessary to mention these payments to the parties, public and media.

The Turkey connection

In a key legal judgment in February 2018, Lady Arbuthnot rejected the argument of Assanges lawyers that the then warrant for his arrest should be quashed and instead delivered a remarkable ruling.

She rejected the findings of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detentiona body composed of international legal expertsthat Assange was being arbitrarily detained, characterised Assanges stay in the embassy as voluntary and concluded Assanges health and mental state was of minor importance.

Lady Arbuthnot became involved in the Assange legal case around September 2017 and presided over the hearing on 7 February 2018, before delivering her judgment a week later. During some of this period 29 January to 1 February her husband was again in Turkey visiting Erdoan and other senior Turkish government officials.

Some of these officials had been specifically exposed by WikiLeaks and had reason to oppose Assanges release. There is no suggestion that Lord Arbuthnot was asked to, or did, exert any pressure on Lady Arbuthnot, nor that she succumbed to any such pressure, but there is an appearance of bias which could have been avoided had this connection been revealed and had Lord Arbuthnot avoided meeting those individuals at that time.

Arbuthnot was part of a four-member delegation, the others being Baroness Neville-Jones, a former chair of the British joint intelligence committee, which co-ordinates GCHQ, MI5 and MI6; Lord Polak, the president of Conservative Friends of Israel; and Lord Trimble.

Among those who Arbuthnot and the other Lords met on the trip were foreign minister Mevlt avuolu and energy minister Berat Albayrak, Erdoans son-in-law. In 2016, WikiLeaks had published 57,934 of Albayraks personal emails, of which more than 300 mentioned avuolu, in its Berats Box release.

Thus at the same time Lady Arbuthnot was presiding over Assanges legal case, her husband was holding talks with senior officials in Turkey exposed by WikiLeaks, some of whom have an interest in punishing Assange and the WikiLeaks organisation.

The ramifications of Assanges exposure of Berat Albayrak and the ruling AKP Party, which had occurred just over a year before, were ongoing at the time of the Lords meetings in Turkey. WikiLeaks publications led to a crackdown on the media in Turkey reporting it, including the imprisonment of journalists and an all-out ban on access to WikiLeaks in the country.

The visit of Lord Arbuthnot and other British lords to Turkey was paid for by the Bosphorus Centre for Global Affairs which describes itself as an NGO monitoring the accuracy of news on Turkey. However, WikiLeaks Berats Box files revealed that the centre was financed by Berat Albayrak and acted as a government front to suppress reporting critical of the government. The centre has also been exposed as running a number of pro-government troll accounts.

It is not known what was discussed on Lord Arbuthnots trip to Turkey, or if the issue of Assange was raised. However, the contacts that the husband of Assanges judge had with powerful political figures who had recently been exposed by WikiLeaks raises concerns about conflicts of interest and whether these should have been declared by Lady Arbuthnot if they have not been.

Lord Arbuthnots military and intelligence connections

Lord Arbuthnot is a member of the House of Lords and was the defence procurement minister in the Conservative government from 1995-97. He later served as chief whip during William Hagues leadership of the party. Arbuthnot was a strong supporter of David Camerons war in Libya in 2011 and it was Cameron who proposed the then James Arbuthnot MP for a peerage in 2015.

Lord Arbuthnot also has connections to former officials in the UK intelligence services which WikiLeaks has exposed in its publications and which have conducted intelligence operations in the UK against WikiLeaks.

Until December 2017, Lord Arbuthnot was one of three directors of a private security firm, SC Strategy, along with the former director of MI6, Sir John Scarlett, and Lord Carlile. Until June 2019, Arbuthnot remained a senior consultant to SC Strategy. Scarlett is mentioned in WikiLeaks releases and has largely remained out of public debates around privacy and surveillance.

Little is known of SC Strategy, which does not have a website, but Companies House lists an address in Watford. Carlile states on his register of interests that SC Strategy was formed by him and Scarlett in 2012 to provide strategic advice on UK public policy, regulation, and business practice. It lists one client as the Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Investment Authority.

It has been reported that SC Strategy appears to maintain a degree of clout in Whitehall and that in 2013 and 2104 the company had a private meeting with the cabinet secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood.

Lord Arbuthnots former partner at SC Strategy, Lord Carlile, was the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation in 2001-11 and is a prominent public defender of the intelligence services.

Lord Arbuthnot was also until February 2019 an adviser to the military corporation, Babcock International, on whose board sits the former head of GCHQ, Sir David Omand.

Until November 2018, Arbuthnot was a member of the advisory board of Information Risk Management, a cybersecurity consultancy based in Cheltenham, the home of GCHQ, one of whose experts is Andrew France, a former deputy director for cyber defence operations at GCHQ.

Before becoming a peer, Lord Arbuthnot was a member of the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee from 2001-06. He is also currently an officer of the all party parliamentary group on cybersecurity which is administered by the Information Security Group (ISG) at Royal Holloway, University of London. The ISG manages a project worth 775,000 that is part-funded by GCHQ.

Lord Arbuthnot himself appears in documents published by WikiLeaks, including two confidential US diplomatic cables. A December 2009 US confidential cable notes Arbuthnot telling an official in the US embassy in London that he supported President Obamas speech on US strategy towards Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Member of the British military establishment

Lord Arbuthnots past and present positions make him firmly a part of the British military industrial community. One of his profiles states that he has a long history of involvement at the top of UK defence and political life. WikiLeaks has styled itself as an adversary of the military community, with many of its releases focusing on the milieu in which people like Lord Arbuthnot operate.

Arbuthnot is a former chair of the parliamentary defence committee a position he held for nine years between 2005 and 2014 during which time WikiLeaks gained worldwide attention through its publishing of files on the Iraq and Afghan wars, in which the UK military was involved. He is also a former member of the national security strategy joint committee and the armed forces bill committee.

Arbuthnots parliamentary profile states: From time to time the member receives hospitality from the UK defence forum, the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces and the all-party parliamentary group on defence and security issues.

Lord Arbuthnot is also the chair of the advisory board of arms corporation Thales Group which has been exposed by WikiLeaks in various releases.

Thales also has major contracts with the MOD including a 700m drone project and a 600m deal to maintain the royal navys warships. One of Thales lucrative business lines is cybersecurity and its website disparagingly refers to WikiLeaks and Assange personally as being able to steal information.

Thales produces watchkeeper drones used by the British military in Afghanistan which have been exposed in WikiLeaks releases. Arbuthnot is a strong supporter of drones: he was the chair of the defence committee when it produced a report highly supportive of British operations in 2014 which recommended bringing watchkeeper to full operating capability.

Lord Arbuthnots parliamentary profile also listed Babcock International as being a personal client in his role as consultant with SC Strategy until February 2019. Babcock has more than 22bn worth of contracts with the MOD and is its largest supplier of support services, supporting more than 70% of all MOD flying training hours.

Like Thales, Babcock has a business line in cyber intelligence and security. Arbuthnot was the procurement minister in 1996 when the government announced the sale of the controversial privatised Rosyth naval dockyard to Babcock.

Lord Arbuthnot is also chair of the Information Assurance Advisory Council, a body whose sponsors have included US arms corporations Raytheon and Northrop Grumman, and which also works on cybersecurity, among other digital information issues. Raytheon is extensively exposed in WikiLeaks releases.

Conflict of interest

Lord Arbuthnots links to the British military establishment constitute professional and political connections between a member of the chief magistrates family and a number of organisations and individuals who are deeply opposed to the work of Assange and WikiLeaks and who have themselves been exposed by the organisation.

UK legal guidance states that any conflict of interest in a litigious situation must be declared. Judicial guidance to magistrates from the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice is clear:

Members of the public must be confident that magistrates are impartial and independent. If you know that your impartiality or independence is compromised in a particular case you must withdraw at once Nor should you hear any case which you already know something about or which touches upon an activity in which you are involved.

Our understanding is that Lady Arbuthnot has failed to disclose any potential conflicts of interest in her role as judge or chief magistrate.

Lady Arbuthnot is known to have stepped aside from adjudicating two other cases due to potential conflicts of interest, but only after investigations by the media. In August 2018, as the judge at the heart of tech giant Ubers legal battle to operate in London, she recused herself to avoid any perceived conflict of interest with her husband.

Lady Arbuthnot reinstated Ubers London licence after it had been judged not a fit and proper private car hire operator. She eventually withdrew from hearing further appeals by the company after an Observer investigation raised questions about links between her husbands work and the company.

Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), the countrys sovereign wealth fund, is a major investor in Uber. QIA was also a client of SC Strategy, where Lord Arbuthnot was a director and then consultant. Lady and Lord Arbuthnot claimed that neither knew QIA invested in Uber, despite it being one of the companys largest shareholders.

In 2017, Lady Arbuthnot also stepped aside from adjudicating a case concerning the broadcast of offensive material on the Holocaust when the defendants legal team raised the issue of reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the judge. This was related to her husbands involvement with Conservative Friends of Israel, a body of which Arbuthnot is a former chair and which had in the past paid for at least one visit to Israel.

Neither Lady nor Lord Arbuthnot returned requests for comment. DM

Daily Maverick will launch Declassifieda new UK-focused investigations and analysis organisation run by the authors of this article at the end of this month.

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or if you are already an Insider.

The rest is here:
Julian Assanges judge and her husbands links to the British military establishment exposed by WikiLeaks - Daily Maverick

There's much more to Roger Stone than his connection to President Donald Trump. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON President Donald Trump's campaign saw Roger Stone as an informal channel to WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential race, when the anti-secrecy group published troves of damaging emails about rival Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, this according to Steve Bannon.

Bannon, the Trump campaign's chief executive at the time, testified Friday that he perceived Stone to be the "access point" to WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange. He said that was based on Stone's claimsthat he had connections to Assange and that he had advanceknowledge that WikiLeaks possessed stolen emails that would hurt Clinton and help Trump.

"Did he ever brag to you about his relationship with Assange?" Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Marando asked Bannon.

"I wouldnt call it bragging. Maybe boasting," Bannon, former executive chairman of the conservative website Breitbart News, said.

'5 categories of lies': Prosecutors tie Roger Stone's alleged crimes to Trump and his campaign

Stone's alleged back-channel efforts with WikiLeaks are at the center of his criminal trial, which began earlier this week. The longtime GOP operative and Trump ally isaccused of lying to the House Intelligence Committeein 2017 about hisefforts to learn of WikiLeaks' plans to release DNC emails.

Stone isalso accused of lying to the committee about his communications with the Trump campaign about WikiLeaks, andtrying to force a witness to lie. Defense attorneys say Stone did not intentionally mislead the committee.

The committee, at the time, was investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible ties to the Trump campaign. Special counsel Robert Mueller's separate Russia investigation found thatRussian intelligence stole damaging emails from the DNC and Clinton's campaign chairman, and passed them to WikiLeaks.

Stone is among the most prominent Trump allies to be indicted as a result of Mueller's investigation.Hefaces seven charges: one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering.

The trial comes amid a fast-movingimpeachment inquirythat has yielded damning testimony about the Trump administration's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, the president's potential 2020 Democratic rival.

Former White House strategist Steve Bannon addresses members of the far right National Front party in the northern French city of Lille.(Photo: AP)

Bannon, who reiteratedthat he was not testifying willingly, is one of four witnesses who testified on behalf of the government during the first week of Stone's trial.

At the center of the charges against Stone is his interactionwith a man whom he claimed was his link to Assange.

Prosecutors allege that Stone falsely told Congressthat Randy Credico, a comedian and radio host who had interviewed Assange on his show, was his source of information about WikiLeaks in the summer of 2016, when the group first published stolen DNC emails.Prosecutors also allege that Stone tried to force Credico to either lie to Congress or not testify by asserting his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Roger Stone indicted: Charges shed new light on Trump campaigns link to WikiLeaks

But Credico, who was the government's key witness,testified that he never hadback-channel communicationswith WikiLeaks. He also saidhe did not have interactions with Assange until August 2016, when the WikiLeaks founder wasa guest on his radio show. Even during that interview, Credico said, he never gained advanceknowledge about WikiLeaks' plans to release DNC emails.

"I never asked him about his business," Credico testified. "Julian Assange is not going to tell me about future releases I wasnt ever going to ask him that."

Credico and Stone met in 2002. Based on Credico's testimony, therelationship seemed tumultuous one that, at least in recent years, was punctuated with squabbles and hostile, expletive-laden emails and text messages many of which were displayed to jurors.

"You are a rat. A stoolie," says an April 2018 email from Stonein which he threatened to take Credico's dog from him. The same day, he allegedly wrote, "I am so ready. Let's get it on.Prepare to die [expletive]."

Defense attorneys did not dispute that Credico was never an intermediary to WikiLeaks, though they sought to discredit Credico.

Who is Roger Stone?Longtime Republican operative worked on campaigns from Richard Nixon to Donald Trump

"You are not an intermediary even though you led Stone to believe that you were one," defense attorney Robert Buschel said.

"I disagree," Credico responded.

Credico also acknowledged having lied to Stone.

"There were exaggerations. There were lies. There were ripoffs, yes," he said.

At times, Credico said, heblustered about his connections to Assange in order to one-up Stone. Other times,he did soto get Stone off his back because he was "pounding" him with questions about WikiLeaks, Credico said.

The cross-examination immediately became hostile, with a visibly frustrated Credico interjecting, offering meanderinganswers, and arguing with the defense attorney. Toward the end of his testimony, Credico maintained that Stone forced him into the situation he is in now.

"I didnt ask for this. Im the bystander. Hes driving the car. I got hit on the side of the road," Credico said.

Roger Stone leaves the federal court Friday, Feb. 1, 2019 in Washington. Stone appeared for a status conference just three days after he pleaded not guilty to felony charges of witness tampering, obstruction and false statements.(Photo: Andrew Harnik, AP)

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/08/roger-stone-trial-steve-bannon-says-stone-access-point-wikileaks-trump-campaign-randy-credico/2517218001/

The rest is here:
Trump campaign saw Roger Stone as its 'access point' to WikiLeaks, Steve Bannon testifies - USA TODAY

WikiLeaks has kicked the hornets nest, and the swarm is headed towards us. With those 13 words, Satoshi Nakamoto stepped into oblivion, leaving a blizzard of unanswered questions that would enshroud his disappearance. That ominous message was to prove his penultimate forum post, dispatched a day before his final entry. What happened to put Wikileaks in the crosshairs of Bitcoins creator?

Also read: Bitcoin History Part 18: The First Bitcoin Wallet

Satoshis words were freighted with such a sense of foreboding that many believe they signified the writing on the wall; a sign that Nakamotos tenure as Bitcoin figurehead had reached its inevitable end. His remark that Wikileaks had kicked the hornets nest referred to the possibility of the controversial whistleblower website turning to bitcoin, after the U.S. government forced companies like Visa, Mastercard and Paypal to blockade the organization. According to an earlier post by Satoshi, the bitcoin project needed to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way, and the association with Wikileaks came too early in its development.

As a disoriented Julian Assange attempts to fight extradition to the U.S. in the British courts, having earlier claimed to have made a 50,000% return on bitcoin in the years following Satoshis disappearance, its interesting to look back to that period December, 2010 when Satoshis retreat began and Wikileaks investment in bitcoin started being seriously discussed. This was a true fork in the road, significant not only to the history of bitcoin but also to state surveillance and those who would kick back at it.

You might wonder why Bitcoins founder was so alarmed by the news that Wikileaks was seeking to raise funds using the decentralized payment system. After all, bitcoin was designed to bypass gatekeepers and obviate the need for a central authority and here was a perfect use case to prove its merits.

In response to a forum member positively touting Wikileaks embracement of bitcoin, published exactly one week before his final forum post, Satoshi said: No, dont bring it on Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.

The problem was very clear, as Satoshi saw it: unwanted government interest in the nascent digital currency was the last thing it needed at that point in time. And since just about every other payment gateway was refusing to process donations to Wikileaks, Julian Assanges solicitation of donations via bitcoin seemed to be a matter of time. At the very least, Satoshi wanted such a move to be discouraged and he conveyed as much to Assange, as recounted by the latter in a 2014 Reddit Ask Me Anything (AMA) session and also in his book When Google Met WikiLeaks:

WikiLeaks read and agreed with Satoshis analysis, and decided to put off the launch of a Bitcoin donation channel until the currency had become more established. WikiLeaks Bitcoin donation address was launched after the currencys first major boom, on June 14, 2011.

Interestingly, the besieged organization opened the floodgates for bitcoin donations just two months after Satoshis last ever correspondence an email to collaborator Gavin Andresen.

The rest, as they say, is history: Wikileaks received tens of millions of dollars in bitcoin donations between 2011 and 2018 (the exact figure continues to be disputed), Assange spent years in Londons Ecuadorian embassy before being arrested, and in Satoshis absence, Bitcoin was to kick many more hornets nests only to emerge, each time, stronger.

Bitcoin History is a multipart series from news.Bitcoin.com charting pivotal moments in the evolution of the worlds first and finest cryptocurrency. Read part 18 here.

Images courtesy of Shutterstock.

Did you know you can verify any unconfirmed Bitcoin transaction with our Bitcoin Block Explorer tool? Simply complete a Bitcoin address search to view it on the blockchain. Plus, visit our Bitcoin Charts to see whats happening in the industry.

Kai's been manipulating words for a living since 2009 and bought his first bitcoin at $12. It's long gone. He's previously written whitepapers for blockchain startups and is especially interested in P2P exchanges and DNMs.

Go here to see the original:
Bitcoin History Part 19: Wikileaks and the Hornet's Nest - Bitcoin News

Jemima hits back at JUI-F leader over WikiLeaks allegations

British documentary producer and Prime Minister Imran's former wife, Jemima Goldsmith, hit back at JUI-F leader Mufti Kifayatullah's hilarious claims that her cousin 'Wiki' founded WikiLeaks.

In an interview on a private news channel, Mufti Kifayatullah had claimed that Jemima's first cousin was a man named Wiki who had founded WikiLeaks.

"Imran Khan, Jemima, the Goldsmith family, Henry Kissinger and WikiLeaks are pieces of the same agenda," Kifayatullah had said on national TV.

This is what Jemima tweeted in response.

"For those who dont speak Urdu - apparently I have a first cousin called Wiki - who set up Wikileaks- which is a Zionist tool, supporting Imran Khans Zionist agenda. This from a so called Islamic scholar/ cleric.... Wiki cousin hai Jemima ka

Mufti Kifayatullah is a leader of the JUI-F who was arrested the day his party began their Azadi March.

A few days later, Kifayatullah was released on bail granted by the Peshawar High Court.

Mufti Kifayatullah was arrested from Islamabad for making inflammatory statements against state institutions.

READ MORE: Mufti Kifayatullah arrested for making inflammatory statements

The protest march is backed by opposition parties including the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, Pakistan Peoples Party and the Awami National Party.

According to its website, WikiLeaks is "a multi-national media organization and associated library. It was founded by its publisher Julian Assange in 2006.

WikiLeaks says it specialises in "the analysis and publication of large datasets of censored or otherwise restricted official materials involving war, spying and corruption. It has so far published more than 10 million documents and associated analyses."

Read the rest here:
Jemima hits back at JUI-F leader over WikiLeaks allegations - The News International

Ex-wife of PM Imran says wait till he [Mufti Kifayatullah] finds about my other cousins Panama Leaks and Vicky Pedia

Ex-wife of PM Imran says wait till he [Mufti Kifayatullah] finds about my other cousins Panama Leaks and Vicky Pedia. PHOTO: FILE

Jemima Goldsmith,former wife of Prime Minister Imran Khan and British documentary producer, hilariously responded to Mufti Kifayatullah,firebrand cleric of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F), who has claimed that her cousin Wiki founded WikiLeaks a non-profit organisation that publishes news leaks by anonymous sources.

During an interviewwith a private TV channel, Kifayatullah had claimed that Jemimas first cousin named Wiki is the actual mastermind behind WikiLeaks.

Imran Khan, Jemima, the Goldsmith family, Henry Kissinger and WikiLeaks are pieces of the same agenda, he alleged.

JUI-F leader Mufti Kifayatullah arrested ahead of Azadi March

While taking a jibe at the JUI-F leader,Jemima posted a series of tweets on the micro-blogging site on Wednesday and tackled the situation on a lighter note.

For those who dont speak Urdu apparently I have a first cousin called Wiki who set up Wikileaks- which is a Zionist tool, supporting Imran Khans Zionist agenda. This from a so called Islamic scholar/ cleric. Wiki cousin hai Jemima ka.

Wait till he finds about my other cousins Panama Leaks and Vicky Pedia, read her other tweet.

Mufti Kifayatullah is a prominent JUI-F leader who was arrested on October 27for his provocative statements about state institutions.

However, he was released on bail granted by the Peshawar High Court a few days.

WikkiLeaks was founded by its publisher Julian Assange in 2006 and has so far published more than 10 million documents and associated analyses.

See original here:
Jemima hilariously hits back at JUI-F cleric over WikiLeaks claim - The Express Tribune

Jemima Goldsmith, former wife of Prime Minister Imran Khan was recently seen in a hilarious banter on her tweets over the hypothetical-yet-witty remarks of Jamiat Ulema e Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) leader Mufti Kifayatullah for calling WikiLeaks her cousin.

Jemima, in a series of tweets on her Twitter, handle on Wednesday, ironically shared Mufi Kifayatullah derogatory claims about her that she is the first cousin of the mastermind Wiki who set up WikiLeaks.

For those who dont speak Urdu apparently I have a first cousin called Wiki who set up Wikileaks- which is a Zionist tool, supporting Imran Khans Zionist agenda. This from a so-called Islamic scholar/ cleric. Wiki cousin hai Jemima ka, Jemima wrote in a playful tweet.

#VickyLeaks https://t.co/UhrxHIqymi

Jemima Goldsmith (@Jemima_Khan) November 6, 2019

Wait till he finds out about my other cousins Panama Leaks and Vicky Pedia.

Wait till he finds out about my other cousins Panama Leaks and Vicky Pedia.

Jemima Goldsmith (@Jemima_Khan) November 6, 2019

The ex-wife of PM Imran Khan while exposing the cringe-worthy remarks of JUI-F cleric who also said that Wiki is a Jewish agent and the cousin of Jemima, Former United States Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, and Pakistans PM Imran Khan.

News update: Vicky Leaks is a JEW and a JEWISH AGENT (as is his cousin Jemima Goldsmith, Imran Khan, and Henry Kissinger) read her other tweet.

News update:

Vicky Leaks is a JEW and a JEWISH AGENT (as is his cousin Jemima Goldsmith, Imran Khan and Henry Kissinger)#OyVey#mullahschmullah#VickyLeaks is trending! https://t.co/G9LOONt60J

Jemima Goldsmith (@Jemima_Khan) November 6, 2019

It has all started when JUI-F leader appeared in a private TV channels talk show and interrupted the anchor with the speculation.

: " "

DEAD!! pic.twitter.com/1IKJ53tG1j

Azhar (@MashwaniAzhar) November 3, 2019

On the other hand, Twitterati took no time in trolling Kifayatullahs claims and the micro-blogging website is being flooded by # VickyLeaks, #Jemima.

Heres what Twitterati are saying:

Wiki is the cousin of Jemima @Jemima_Khan Now you should inquire about Panama maybe he is also your cousin but you don't know

Humayun AbaXy (@AbbasiHumayun) November 6, 2019

Mad Halwa.. Don't show your jalwa, it's totally halwa, His mind is fucked up..

M.Shakoor (@LightintheDarkF) November 6, 2019

This brightened my day. Thanks pic.twitter.com/qYY5udFmGv

Furyan Skillz (@furyanskillz) November 6, 2019

Hahaha SERIOUSLY man these so called scholars are making fun of Pakistan and Islaam as well..Dear @Jemima_Khan I apologise from you, bcz of these trouble makers you suffered alot.LOVE and RESPECT for you #__ pic.twitter.com/jgV97lsWty

UzmaKhan' (@UzmaKhanJIT) November 6, 2019

: Meanwhile Mufti kifayat after seeing this @Jemima_Khan tweet right now #__ pic.twitter.com/8jJlmXq36p

Masood khan (@Masoodk51214) November 6, 2019

It just blows my mind how he made this story up and how confident he was lying on a national television Its all your other cousins #VickyHows (WikiHow) fault who taught him all these skills. #VickyLeaks

TANVEER-UL-HASSAN (@tanvirulhassan) November 6, 2019

For those who think Wiki of "WikiLeaks" is the cozen of jemima#__ pic.twitter.com/lAdzG417N5

Sa AD (@Imranist_01) November 6, 2019

See more here:
Jemimas hilarious response to Mufti Kifayatllah over WikiLeaks is winning internet! - OyeYeah News