Deep Politics Forum

Magda Hassan Wrote:Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Is Karl Rove Driving the Effort to Prosecute Julian Assange?


Fredrik Reinfeldt and George W. Bush
Former Bush White House strategist Karl Rove likely is playing a leading role in the effort to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, a source with ties to the justice community tells Legal Schnauzer.

Assange was arrested last week in London for alleged sex crimes in Sweden. A lawyer for Assange said Monday that the arrest was a ruse designed to give the United States more time to build a case against Assange on other charges. The lawyer said a grand jury is being prepared in Washington, D.C., to look into WikiLeaks' activities. Meanwhile, Assange has a court date today in the UK, where he is expected to seek a release on bail.

That Assange's legal troubles would originate in Sweden probably is not a coincidence, our source says. Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has been called "the Ronald Reagan of Europe," and he has a friendship with Rove that dates back at least 10 years, to the George W. Bush campaign for president in 2000. Reinfeldt reportedly asked Rove to help with his 2010 re-election in Sweden.

On the hot seat for his apparent role in the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, Rove sought comfort in Sweden. "When [Rove] was in trouble and did not want to testify on the three times he was invited [by the U.S. Congress], he wound up in Sweden," our source says. "Further, it was [Reinfeldt] that first hired Karl when he got thrown out of the White House.

"Clearly, it appears that [Rove], who claims to be of Swedish descent, feels a kinship to Sweden . . . and he has taken advantage of it several times."

Why would Rove be interested in corralling Julian Assange? To help protect the Bush legacy, our source says. "The very guy who has released the documents that damage the Bushes the most is also the guy that the Bush's number one operative can control by being the Swedish prime minister's brain and intelligence and economic advisor."

Could Rove also be trying to protect himself? What if WikiLeaks has documents--or Rove thinks it could get documents--that prove "Turd Blossom's" role in criminal activity during the Bush years? What if someone with a conscience from the Bush administration--if such a person exists--provided WikiLeaks with documents that show Rove's role in political prosecutions, the unlawful firings of U.S. attorneys, and more? Could Rove be trying to save his own doughy butt?

Reporting from Amy Goodman, of Democracy Now!, lends support to our source's insights about Rove and Sweden. In a piece from December 2008, "Karl Rove in Sweden," Goodman wrote about the ties between "Bush's Brain" and Reinfeldt. This was just a few weeks after Barack Obama had won the presidential election in the United States:

Traditional Swedish politics also are in flux. Brian Palmer is an American, a former Harvard lecturer, who has immigrated to Sweden and become a Swedish citizen. Palmer has penned a biography of Sweden’s prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt. Palmer credits Reinfeldt, 43, with leading the shift away from the progressive social policies for which Sweden has become world-famous. He said Reinfeldt, in 1993, “wrote a book, ‘The Sleeping People,’ where he said that the welfare state should only prevent starvation, nothing beyond that. After being elected ... one of his first major visits abroad was to George Bush in the White House.”

Reinfeldt and his Moderate Party hired Karl Rove as a political consultant to help with the election coming in 2010. Palmer went on: “We have a real kind of silent war on the labor movement. We have a rather dramatic change in the tax system, abolishing the inheritance tax and most property taxes, cutbacks in social-welfare institutions.” This week, a new coalition of center-left political parties formed to challenge this rightward drift.

The U.S. electorate has thoroughly rebuked the Bush administration, handing Barack Obama and the Democrats a mandate for change on issues of war and health care, among others. One of the world’s leading laboratories for innovative social policies, Sweden is now wrestling with its own future. Those seeking change in the U.S. would be wise to watch Sweden, beyond Nobel week.

In December 2009, Goodman conducted an interview with Brian Palmer, Reinfeldt's biographer:

AMY GOODMAN: Brian Palmer, talk about the shift that’s going on in politics here—you’ve written a biography of the current prime minister—and how this fits in with the story we just talked about, the story of Alfred Nobel, both the Peace Prizes and his founding of, really, the weapons industry in this country.

BRIAN PALMER: One can begin by saying that the reasons for Sweden’s reputation as a progressive paradise, the strongest labor movement in the world with 87 percent of workers unionized, creating over many decades the strongest welfare state, the one that on the UN Human Poverty Index has the least poverty in the world. And then, what we’ve seen over the last twenty years, but particularly since the 2006 election, is a move away from all of that.

We have a prime minister who in the 1990s wrote a book, The Sleeping People, where he said that the welfare state should only prevent starvation, nothing beyond that, no other standard should be guaranteed. After being elected, Fredrik Reinfeldt, one of his first major visits abroad was to George Bush in the White House, this in spite of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, a visit that many people thought shouldn’t have happened, his coalition then getting—bringing over Karl Rove for advice and support—Karl Rove, the architect of President Bush’s electoral victories.

AMY GOODMAN: They brought Karl Rove here?

BRIAN PALMER: This past summer.

AMY GOODMAN: Because?

BRIAN PALMER: Because he can offer good advice on how to win the 2010 election. And—

AMY GOODMAN: Is this unusual for Karl Rove to do this kind of international consulting?

BRIAN PALMER: According to his website, it’s his only foreign consulting, for the Moderate Party of Sweden.

AMY GOODMAN: Wasn’t the current prime minister visiting Bush in the White House?

BRIAN PALMER: Yeah, and there was much—many people writing that this shouldn’t happen. He justified the visit, that he would persuade Bush to sign the Kyoto Accord, but people who were there say that he didn’t even really attempt that.
http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2010/...rt-to.html

If Rove is coordinating the Assange case, it more or less shows that Obama is a Bush pawn. Obama was a change of face but resided in the same beast's body...

David Guyatt Wrote:If Rove is coordinating the Assange case, it more or less shows that Obama is a Bush pawn. Obama was a change of face but resided in the same beast's body...

That was pretty obvious from his 'financial' and 'foreign conquest', I mean 'foreign policy' teams and no changes in all the promised change.....and everyone in America hunting for spare change. The Beast has America by the throat and seems will not let go until it is dead....:motz: It won't be long now..... The Obama 'card' was one that really fooled the Liberals and still has most fooled....I know and am unable to convince many....they say...just give him time.... Sorry, time was 'up' a few days after election, once I saw who was to be his 'team'. It was a kill democracy in America team, and still is....same Beast...different Hydra head.

I wouldn't be surprised if Assange is granted bail today. But that should not be seen as any sort of vindication of British justice, as he will be wearing a tag 24/7 and, I should imagine, will be under surveillance by dark forces.

The "great game" continues...

David Guyatt Wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Assange is granted bail today. But that should not be seen as any sort of vindication of British justice, as he will be wearing a tag 24/7 and, I should imagine, will be under surveillance by dark forces.

The "great game" continues...

I think that is what they'd like for all of us....being under surveillance [just about done] and wering an electronic tag [coming sooner than you think!].....Assange is in Court now...we will see.....

Meanwhile in the U SS A legislators are calling more and more for hauling all of the media [about all of them] into Court for [re]printing the cables and other 'secret' Wikileak leaks.....Rove leaks and Chaney leaks, Bush leaks and lies....they all go unmentioned and unexamined. :bebored: Prior to 911 none of this would have been tolerated; 9-11 was the 'Enabling Act'!

Bail Arguments and the Appeal
Submitted by Peter Kemp on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 11:44

It's taken a while before some detailed information has come to light on the arguments presented by prosecutor and defence at the bail hearing yesterday.

The Telegraph reports:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...kiLeaks-Ju...

Earlier, during the two hour long hearing, the court was told that the “strength” of the evidence was poor.

His legal team argued that particularly the rape allegation was wrong and if the case was tried in Britain the case would not be classified as such a crime.

This refers or alludes to, apparently, the rape allegation being in the nature of a relatively minor sexual molestation in which case it seems to me, it then doesn't fit within the 12 month European Arrest Warrant system requirement of an offence where the maximum sentence must be 12 months or more for extradition to be valid. If in the UK such an alleged rape evidence was prima facie (on the face of it) low category molestation, per UK law, attracting less than 12 months custodial sentence, then it would not appear to qualify as an extraditable offence.

What interested me more was this further quote from the Telegraph.

But Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, told the court that the “strength of the evidence” in bail hearings in extradition hearings “ought not to be the primary focus of this court”.

She said that the warrant had been issued in “good faith” by prosecutors with “impeccable reputations” and that British court system should not think otherwise.

UK bail laws (emphatically) apply. It was a bail application, not the substantive extradition case proper. Ms Lindfield has the wrong end of the stick here. A weak case is in fact a powerful reason why bail should be granted, is something that should be the primary focus. The UK Court would not care a jot about irrelevant character references for her colleagues, it focuses entirely on the extradition law applicable (update: bail is included), the lawful ie admissable evidence and oral submissions presented.

And it gets worse:

She added she wanted to explain to the court “why we don’t have the evidence”.

WHAAAAAT? We "don't have the evidence."

“How does one test the evidence strength of the allegations in a case made by a foreign jurisdiction,” Ms Linfield told the court.

You do it as any half respectable prosecution service would by producing the complainant written statements, medical evidence, other expert opinion eg DNA evidence, phone records, telephone taps whatever and you serve it on the defendant first as a legal right of defendants to avoid prosecution by ambush!!!. That's what you do.

You produce it in some form at a bail application, make submissions on it and let the judge decide how strong it is. (Ordinarily in normal Magistrate proceedings in Australia such evidence is produced in a police facts sheet because the full brief of evidence takes weeks/months and is yet to be served on the defence--these "facts" are a summary of what is alleged to have occurred plus police observations eg injuries, plus eg list of drugs seized/quantities whatever, plus eg how many witnesses were present and saw the conduct and other extraneous evidence*.)

So all they have is the allegations. Sounds like either the complainants have not made statements, or if they have, the Swedish authorities are too ashamed to provide them. Who cares about the impeccable reputations of her colleagues when all they can produce is allegations?

I am now firmly of the opinion as a result of that statement by Ms Lindfield, that this is all about a fishing expedition and an abuse of the EAW.

“It is submitted that the allegation is quite often the sole primary evidence in respect of these cases.”

Well if that's the case, if all they could produce at a UK bail was "Ms A alleges this", "Ms W alleges that", it is no wonder bail was granted yesterday. I await more reports on what exactly Ms Lindfield produced, further than allegations. I suspect there is no more.

Ms Lindfield appears to believe, apparently that bail should be refused on the basis that the risk of absconding can never be entirely eliminated. If that's the case, and applied in Sweden, heaven help Swedish defendants.

The question must be asked "Where are the sworn or affirmed statements of the alleged victims?" That is the meat, if you will, of the strength of the prosecution case, in the absence of corroborative non hearsay witnesses or other forms of evidence.

I think the Swedes miscalculated and didn't do their homework on the UK bail system. A half decent brief with reasonable strength demonstrated of their case (if it exists) and they might well have had their victory.

We await the appeal with great interest.

* Often stuffed full of inadmissable hearsay evidence which has to be objected to at a bail application beyond it being evidence only of a complaint.

UPDATE:
I forgot to mention an alternative to written statements, which is video recorded records of interview (ROI). This is quite often used with children. The alleged victim is questioned in the same way as giving oral evidence at a trial, ie no leading questions (putting words in the victim's mouth.) At trial, that witnesses evidence is played to the court and then the child is cross examined by CCTV with a support person in that CCTV recording room which is part of the court facility.

It will also be interesting at the appeal if the prosecution submits there was an error of law in the balancing exercise of all the factors involved in the lower court yesterday.

Prediction: The lower court decision to be upheld.

Bail is granted but who knows what can happen in the mean time.

Magda Hassan Wrote:Bail is granted but who knows what can happen in the mean time.

U.S. Tries to Build Case for Conspiracy by WikiLeaks
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
Published: December 15, 2010

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors, seeking to build a case against the WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange for his role in a huge dissemination of classified government documents, are looking for evidence of any collusion in his early contacts with an Army intelligence analyst suspected of leaking the information.

State’s Secrets

Articles in this series examine American diplomatic cables as a window on relations with the rest of the world in an age of war and terrorism.

Justice Department officials are trying to find out whether Mr. Assange encouraged or even helped the analyst, Pfc. Bradley Manning, to extract classified military and State Department files from a government computer system. If he did so, they believe they could charge him as a conspirator in the leak, not just as a passive recipient of the documents who then published them.

Among materials prosecutors are studying is an online chat log in which Private Manning is said to claim that he had been directly communicating with Mr. Assange using an encrypted Internet conferencing service as the soldier was downloading government files. Private Manning is also said to have claimed that Mr. Assange gave him access to a dedicated server for uploading some of them to WikiLeaks.

:evil:Adrian Lamo:evil:, an ex-hacker in whom Private Manning confided and who eventually turned him in, said Private Manning detailed those interactions in instant-message conversations with him.

He said the special server’s purpose was to allow Private Manning’s submissions to “be bumped to the top of the queue for review.” By Mr. Lamo’s account, Private Manning bragged about this “as evidence of his status as the high-profile source for WikiLeaks.”

Wired magazine has published excerpts from logs of online chats between Mr. Lamo and Private Manning. But the sections in which Private Manning is said to detail contacts with Mr. Assange are not among them. Mr. Lamo described them from memory in an interview with The Times, but he said he could not provide the full chat transcript because the F.B.I. had taken his hard drive, on which it was saved.

Since WikiLeaks began making public large caches of classified United States government documents this year, Justice Department officials have been struggling to come up with a way to charge Mr. Assange with a crime. Among other things, they have studied several statutes that criminalize the dissemination of restricted information under certain circumstances, including the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.

But while prosecutors have used such laws to go after leakers and hackers, they have never successfully prosecuted recipients of leaked information for passing it on to others — an activity that can fall under the First Amendment’s strong protections of speech and press freedoms.

Last week, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said he had just authorized investigators to take “significant” steps, declining to specify them. This week, one of Mr. Assange’s lawyers in Britain said they had “heard from Swedish authorities there has been a secretly impaneled grand jury” in northern Virginia.

Justice Department officials have declined to discuss any grand jury activity. But in interviews, people familiar with the case said the department appeared to be attracted to the possibility of prosecuting Mr. Assange as a co-conspirator to the leaking because it is under intense pressure to make an example of him as a deterrent to further mass leaking of electronic documents over the Internet.

By bringing a case against Mr. Assange as a conspirator to Private Manning’s leak, the government would not have to confront awkward questions about why it is not also prosecuting traditional news organizations or investigative journalists who also disclose information the government says should be kept secret — including The New York Times, which also published some documents originally obtained by WikiLeaks.

“I suspect there is a real desire on the part of the government to avoid pursuing the publication aspect if it can pursue the leak aspect,” said Daniel C. Richman, a Columbia law professor and former federal prosecutor. “It would be so much neater and raise fewer constitutional issues.”

It has been known that investigators were looking for evidence that one or more people in Boston served as an intermediary between Private Manning and WikiLeaks, taking a disc of files he had copied from a computer while deployed in Iraq and somehow delivering it to the Web site.

But Mr. Lamo said Private Manning also sometimes uploaded information directly to Mr. Assange, whom he had initially sought out online. The soldier sent a “test leak” of a single State Department cable from Iceland to see if Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks were who they claimed to be, Mr. Lamo said.

“At some point, he became satisfied that he was actually talking to Assange and not some unknown third party posing as Assange, and based on that he began sending in smaller amounts of data from his computer,” Mr. Lamo said. “Because of the nature of his Internet connection, he wasn’t able to send large data files easily. He was using a satellite connection, so he was limited until he did an actual physical drop-off when he was back in the United States in January of this year.”

Still, prosecutors would most likely need more than a chat transcript laying out such claims to implicate Mr. Assange, Professor Richman said. Even if prosecutors could prove that it was Private Manning writing the messages to Mr. Lamo, a court might deem the whole discussion as inadmissible hearsay evidence.

Prosecutors could overcome that hurdle if they obtain other evidence about any early contacts — especially if they could persuade Private Manning to testify against Mr. Assange. But two members of a support network set up to raise money for his legal defense, Jeff Paterson and David House, said Private Manning had declined to cooperate with investigators since his arrest in May.

Meanwhile, WikiLeaks is taking steps to distance itself from the suggestion that it actively encourages people to send in classified material. It has changed how it describes itself on its submissions page. “WikiLeaks accepts a range of material, but we do not solicit it,” its Web site now says.

It also deleted the word “classified” from a description of the kinds of material it accepts. And it dropped an assertion that “Submitting confidential material to WikiLeaks is safe, easy and protected by law,” now saying instead: “Submitting documents to our journalists is protected by law in better democracies.”

WikiLeaks is also taking steps to position itself more squarely as a news organization, which would it easier to invoke the First Amendment as a shield. Where its old submissions page made few references to journalism, it now uses “journalist” and forms of the word “news” 23 times.

Another new sentence portrays its primary work as filtering and analyzing documents, not just posting them raw. It says its “journalists write news stories based on the material, and then provide a link to the supporting documentation to prove our stories are true.”

Assange has had his hearing this morning and will be back in court 7th - 8th Feb for the extradition hearing.

WHY IS THE SWEDISH GOVERNMENT REALLY AFTER JULIAN ASSANGE?
ASSANGE and WIKILEAKS ARE BEING USED AS A COMMIODITY
BY SWEDEN'S WALLENBERG FAMILY and INVESTORS AB?

ANONYMOUS OPERATION WANT - LONDON, UK - There have been published news reports that Karl Rove is somehow connected with the Swedish government. Rove's American Crossroads, the affiliations with Sweden's "TIMBRO" think-tank for the "Moderate Party", and political campaign consulting for Prime Minister Fredrick Reinfeldt do appear to exist. The famous dirty smear tactics, known to be masterminded by Karl Rove ("Bush's Brain") in US politics, also appear familiar in the attacks on Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Everything from the re-opening of a previously closed investigation -- into allegations that Julian Assange had unprotected sex in Sweden with two willing sex partners then turning it into a warrant and twisted international smear campaign launched into the media as "rape" and "molestation."

What has lacked in the reporting of this Rove and Reinfeldt connection is, how would either benefit from all this dirty work? Does anyone assume that Karl Rove would help Hillary Clinton and feel empathy for her embarrassments over the WikiLeaks publication of numerous US Embassy cables? More likely it is the opposite. It is well known that Rove is no friend of the Clintons or the Democratic Party. Therefore, we are left to assume that Rove is still assisting the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld parties to the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions? Is Karl Rove trying to take down Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, out of pure loyalty to the war machine? Is Karl Rove doing his part in keeping the Truth about War Crimes hidden? It is possible, but not a probable reason.

Following the money will lead to a deeper connection and worth billions of dollars, or Kronars, if you are Swedish. First have a look at who the Swedish Government representatives are and the Moderate Party's history.

Historically, the Moderate Party has been pro- War. The Moderate Party was formed in 1904, with the motto "Military Defense Come First."

Carl Bildt was leader of the Party from 1986 to 1999. Since then, he has been a member of the RAND Corporation and Sweden's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

"The Cabinet of Carl Bildt did much to reform the Swedish government: cut taxes, cut public spending, introduced voucher schools, made it possible for counties to privatize health care, liberalized markets for telecommunications and energy, and privatized former publicly owned companies (further de-regulations and privatizations were carried out by the following Social Democratic Cabinet of Göran Persson). The negotiations for membership with the European Union (EU) were also finalized." (see Wikipedia)

During this period, Fredrick Reinfeldt was "head of the Moderate Youth," being groomed as the next Prime Minister. He was elected as the new party leader in 2003. However, with more public opposition growing against the Moderates, along with increased support of both Green and Pirate parties, the Moderates had to form a coalition with other political parties if they were to stay in power. In 2006, the coalition formed with the Centre Party, the Liberal People's Party and the Christian Democrats came in time for the general elections. Fredrick Reinfeldt continued on as Sweden's Prime Minister with the agenda of the Moderate Party.

Not by coincidence, everything that Bildt and Reinfeldt have done while in government have benefitted Sweden's Wallenberg Family financially. The Wallenberg family dates back to the seventeenth century. In 1856, André Oscar Wallenberg founded the predecessor of today's Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken, or SEB. Renowned as bankers, industrialists, politicians, diplomats and philanthropists, Sweden's Wallenberg family have a very low-key public profile. Still, a Swedish hedge fund manager was quoted as saying, "They are a bit like royalty." The Wallenberg business empire is referred to as the "Wallenberg sphere"a large group of companies where its investment company, Investor, or foundation asset management company, FAM, hold a controlling interest.

The Wallenberg family has occasionally been accused of nepotism, particularly when Peter Wallenberg (senior) was given a retirement salary of 16 MSEK (1.6 million Euros) per year by Ericsson, despite never having been employed by the company.

In the twenty-first century, the fifth generation of Wallenberg's took over family operations: Marcus, Jacob, and Peter. Educated at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Jacob Wallenberg is Chairman of the Board of Investor AB, and Vice-Chairman of SEB. He also serves on the boards of Atlas Copco AB (Vice Chairman), SAS AB (Vice Chairman) and ABB. The largest single stake in ABB is held by the Wallenberg-controlled Swedish investment company INVESTOR AB.

"In 1916, new legislation made it more difficult for banks to own stocks in industrial companies on a long-term basis. Investor was formed as an investment part of Stockholms Enskilda Bank, at the time the largest instrument of power in the Wallenberg family." (see Wikipedia)

The core businesses of the Wallenberg's INVESTOR include ABB (Industrials), AstraZeneca (Healthcare), Atlas Copco (Industrials), Electrolux (Consumer discretionary), Ericsson (Technology), Husqvarna (Consumer discretionary), Saab (Industrials), and SEB (Financials). (see INVESTOR website http://www.investorab.com/en/OurInvestme...tments.htm )

What many people don't know, outside of Sweden, is that these Industrial sectors are creating some of the most deadly war machines i.e. Saab's Grippen NG with AESA radar. Notably a topic of a WikiLeaks published Stockholm Embassy cable. A huge embarrassment that revealed that the U.S. was not being honest about helping Saab get the AESA radar capabilities in order to sell Gripen fighter jets to Norway, but instead were helping Boeing get the Norway contracts. While costing the Wallenberg's/INVESTORS Saab a great deal of money, the U.S. eventually helped by having General Electric and Honeywell climb on board with a partnership in the deadly Gripen NG fighter with AESA radar. (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTtq8vPDd...68&index=6 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F0P4xgV3Z4 )
Considering, the WikiLeaks publication could only have helped Wallenberg/INVESTOR/SAAB by revealing the Truth of the AESA negotiations, the question would remain of why would the Wallenberg's use their political clout with Bildt, Reinfeldt or even Rove to help the U.S. get a hold of Julian Assange and bring down WikiLeaks?

CRIMES, PENALTIES, PROBATION, ANTI-TRUST HURDLES, MERGERS & THE NASDAQ PRIZE

SEPTEMBER 29, 2010 - U.S. DOJ LEGAL PROBLEM #1
It appears that Jacob Wallenberg began having legal problems with the U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General Eric Holder, when ABB Ltd and two subsidiaries were found guilty in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. <span>September 29, 2010</span>, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a Press Release that, Jacob Wallenberg's, ABB Ltd. "Will Pay $19 Million in Criminal Penalties" and the "Company to Pay More Than $58 Million in Criminal and Civil Penalties, Disgorgement and Interest." This investigation and case was far reaching and included bribery, international money laundering, illegal vehicle sales in the "Food for Oil" program in Iraq and more. Locations including, Sugar Land, Texas (Headquarters of Halliburton and BP are also located in Sugar Land, TX) to Mexico, Jordan, Iraq. Considering the circumstances, that nobody involved went to jail; $58 million wasn't much to pay. However, the three year probationary period and other unknown agreements made with the Justice Department were likely not appreciated by Jacob Wallenberg, INVESTORS AB, ABB.
(see http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/Septe...-1096.html )

One can only imagine that this legal problem must not have sat well with Jacob Wallenberg, after the financial difficulties experienced with ABB. In 2006, they returned from the brink of bankruptcy by settling asbestos liability claims filed against ABB's U.S. subsidiaries, Combustion Engineering and Lummus Global. Seems strange when one considers that by the late 1990s the Wallenberg's controlled some 40% of the value of the companies listed on the Swedish stock exchange. Even though ABB has had ups and downs, it is a major world player. Headquartered in Zurich, ABB is one of the largest engineering companies as well as one of the largest conglomerates in the world. It is a global leader in power and automation technologies, the world's largest builder of electricity grids.

In 2000, ABB signed a contract for the delivery of equipment and services for two North Korean nuclear power plants, to be supplied under an agreement with the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). ABB's own nuclear business was sold to BNFL (British Nuclear Fuels) and merged into Westinghouse Electric Company. This was during the time period that Donald Rumsfeld was a board member of ABB and helped in the delivery of the Nuclear power plants to North Korea (see http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/10/rumsfeld-abb/ )
December 8, 2010, ABB's subsidiary, Brock Acquisition Corporation, commenced a cash tender offer for all of the outstanding shares of common stock of Baldor at a price of $63.50 per share, in accordance with the terms and conditions of a merger agreement entered into between ABB and Baldor as of November 29, 2010.
December 16, 2010 Jacob Wallenberg's INVESTOR AB must be doing well financially, because they have decided to buy an extremely large portion of the NASDAQ OMX (stock exchange). INVESTOR reported (see http://www.investorab.com/en/Investors_m...leases.htm ) INVESTOR's advance purchase of millions of NASDAQ shares makes Wallenberg/INVESTORS a leader and the ability to have a chair position on the board IF U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder approves it. However, there are more U.S. Justice Department problems that Jacob Wallenberg's INVESTOR AB and ABB are faced with.

December 21, 2010 INVESTORS AB, ABB Press Release

"ABB and Baldor Receive Request for Additional Information from DOJ Relating to Pending Acquisition.
Zurich, Switzerland and Fort Smith, Arkansas, USA, December 21, 2010 ABB Ltd (NYSE: ABB), the leading power and automation technology group, and Baldor Electric Company (NYSE: BEZ), a North American leader in industrial motors, announced today that the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued requests for additional information and documentary material ("Second Request") in connection with its review of ABB's pending acquisition of Baldor. ABB and Baldor believe that the DOJ issued the requests in order to give itself additional time to complete its review of the transaction. Both parties remain confident that the DOJ will conclude that the transaction raises no antitrust concerns.

As previously disclosed, on December 8, 2010, ABB subsidiary, Brock Acquisition Corporation, commenced a cash tender offer for all of the outstanding shares of common stock of Baldor at a price of $63.50 per share, in accordance with the terms and conditions of a merger agreement entered into between ABB and Baldor as of November 29, 2010. The closing of the tender offer is subject to customary terms and conditions, including the expiration or termination of the applicable waiting period under Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended. While a definitive closing date cannot yet be determined, ABB and Baldor maintain their expectation that the transaction will close in the first quarter of 2011."

The tender offer is scheduled to expire at 12:00 midnight, New York City time, on the night of Monday, January 10, 2011, unless extended pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement or the applicable rules and regulations of the SEC. Any extension of the offer will be announced no later than 9:00 am, New York City time, on the first business day following the scheduled expiration time."

TIMING IS EVERYTHING

On January 11, 2011 the publisher and editor of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, is scheduled to appear again in the London, UK court regarding the European Warrant filed by the Swedish government over allegation of "sexual misconduct." Will the UK Court order extradition of Julian Assange to Sweden? No doubt, once in Sweden, he would be turned over the U.S. for more trumped up charges of "Espionage" and "Conspiracy."

On December 14, 2011 it became apparent that U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had begun an investigation into alleged "Espionage" and "Conspiracy" of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Twitter, an online social network received by FAX, to its Trust & Safety Department, from DOJ, a U.S. District Court of Eastern Virginia order to turn over all communications made by WikiLeaks editor, Julian Assange, associate Rop Gongriyp, former associate and Member of Iceland's Parliament, Brigitta Jonsdottir, and Bradley Manning.

"Esse non Videri" ("To be, not to be seen")
Sweden's Wallenberg's have a very low-key public profile; the family motto is "Esse non Videri" ("To be, not to be seen"). Still, a Swedish hedge fund manager was quoted as saying, "They are a bit like royalty." The Wallenberg business empire is referred to as the "Wallenberg sphere"a large group of companies where its investment company, Investor, or foundation asset management company, FAM, hold a controlling interest.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, it is probable that Jacob Wallenberg sought advice from Karl Rove on how to "deal" with DOJ Eric Holder over these business legal problems in the U.S. Rove may have helped him with a strategy - being that U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder wanted to stop any further TRUTH about war crimes being revealed to the public. No doubt, Rove was not interested in helping Hillary Clinton or the Democrats over their failure of protecting overly "classified" information.

If Jacob Wallenberg and INVESTORS AB, ABB only had one legal problem and criminal charges by the U.S. Department of Justice, it may be difficult to conclude that he is indeed the Man in the Shadow, "Esse non Videri," pulling the political strings in Sweden to get Julian Assange extradited. However, when there are three important business issues under the thumb of U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, why wouldn't Jacob Wallenberg be willing to "negotiate?" Both men come from the world of high finance and trading commodities. U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder worked for Lehman Brothers and understands the importance, financially and psychologically, of "Making a Return" on an Asset or Investment. It's just one more "Win Win" game. Hillary and Holder get Julian Assange. Jacob Wallenberg, INVESTORS AB gets his NASDAQ OMX purchased approved, a chair on the board of NASDAQ along with the merger of ABB and Baldor.

*NOTE INFORMATION IS FREE. THIS INFORMATION CAME FROM ANONYMOUS OPERATION WANT. FREE JULIAN ASSANGE. FREE BRADLEY MANNING. HANDS OFF WIKILEAKS. WHISTLEBLOWERS REPORTING WAR CRIMES ARE NOT CRIMINALS. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. FREEDOM OF SPEECH. WE ARE ANONYMOUS. WE ARE EVERYONE. WE ARE EVERYWHERE. WE ARE LEGION. WE DO NOT FORGET. WE DO NOT FORGIVE. EXPECT US.





WHAT DOES SWEDEN REALLY WANT?

Some interesting insights into Wikileaks and similar efforts, Girgitta Jonsdottir and others from their speeches at a recent Berkeley conference. Here.