UKC

Aaron Banks. His dealings with money & people come across as pretty sleazy. Or ought I to get out a bit more? 

That should read Arron - tho' he is listed under alternative spellings of his name at Companies House

I wonder why?

If the allegations are true then treason as well as electoral fraud would seem to be a reasonable charge, if it doesnt fit the existing definition of treason then it blinkin well ought to!

Is one of the alternatives"arsehole"?

Or maybe "aarsehole"?

He's up to his neck in dodgy Russian connections and funded indirectly by Putin's nefarious financial empire.

Private Eye have uncovered a degree of inconsistency in the financial probity of his business empire.

There's a good outline of the implausibility of Banks' miraculous resurrection from nearly out of business to one of the largest donor's in British political history in 3 years:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/adam-ramsay/how-did-arron-banks-...

An excellent read. Despite protestations about the 'will of the people', it would appear that democracy isn't at the core of Brexit.

Thanks for the link. I think it's worth copying the concluding paragraphs here:

"Crucial to maintaining the fabric of democracy in Britain is understanding where large donors have made their money, and just as importantly, how.

"Our review of the publicly available records for Banks’ business empire, and his own public statements, has revealed a patchwork of legal disputes, regulator interventions, and poor corporate governance. Two of Banks’ claimed previous employers have denied he ever worked for them. The value of his businesses are materially lower than Banks’ own inflated boasts and, while still a wealthy man, was he wealthy enough to give so much to the Brexit campaign, without some other undisclosed source of income?

"How Banks could afford to give so lavishly remains a mystery. There is no doubt that Banks did more than most to make Brexit happen – the question is, how could he afford it?"

... and for added dot-joining potential, it also mentioned he has a Russian wife, whose "former husband had been interviewed twice by Special Branch because they suspected her of working for the Russian government." Just sayin'.

Shouldn't this void the Brexit vote if true ? 

Worth checking out James Patrick on Twitter. He was claiming years ago that Russia were engaged in a war of disinformation on social media to promote Trump, Brexit and other divisive politics. His network analysis uncovered thousands of bots and troll accounts used to push agenda. His Alternative War book is worth a read.

I thought the village in Shetland had an extra T not an extra A

Not commenting about the voters but the movers and shakers are traitors, acting for interests far from the good of the UK

They never stopped - The russian state grew out of controlling the people using information and disinformation and it has been an intrinsic part of their outlook on their inner and outer world since then.

The Cold War methods have never been forgotten but are now helped by some aspects of  the new electronic warspace which are used by all of us, where it was previously restricted to military radio nets.  Electronic media hide the source, spread it widely and with amazing ability to target individuals and groups and also create a fuzzy ground where the apparent source of disinformation is easily placed elsewhere and the truth is hard to know by the general population.

Not to mention how easy it is to boost the hidden war effort by using criminal and expert interests in the same electronic space who will help willingly if it is made worth their while and wile.

Feind Hoert Mit

Should or shouldn't is relevant, won't is the reality. Parliament alone realistically can't stop brexit, it's tied itself up in knots, some by mistake, some by design.

It'll take years to investigate Banks and if he is to face charges it'll be a long complex trial, none of this will happen before it's long since become an irrelevant sideshow.

jk

Someone allegedly doing business with Russia, a country which mines more diamonds than it can sell, buys empty diamond mines in Africa.  Hmmm.

If only there were some neat way of untraceably transferring significant sums with minimal losses and plausible deniability the story might begin to make sense. Still, I'm damned if I can think how one might go about it.

Given the Litvinyenko/Skripol indiscretion it's surprising really that we don't see more of a clear 'f*** you' fingerprint on the brexit mess if Russia was substantially involved in funding and championing it, perhaps it will develop more clearly once the A50 clock runs out, always possible of course for one reason or another there are no fingerprints to develop.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151104095235.htm maybe science is slowly catching up with scoundrels. The 2015 date on this paper is interesting, I wonder if there are a few around the world wondering if they've done their laundry properly.

jk

Agreed!

So Polonium, nerve agent, torture, or a hit squad at the embassy ?

Can I select more than one option?

I expect most will.

I'm struggling to see the conspiracy here? Diamonds mined in Russia are not classified as "blood diamonds" are they? Are you suggesting that an exhausted mine bought for peanuts will suddenly start producing (Russian) diamonds and can then be sold for large profits? 

Is it not a way to get around the various sanctions against Russia?

Maybe, although I would have thought China(and India?) would probably offer plenty of bandwidth for Alrosa to shift their rough diamonds around the world if US sanctions affected diamond exports (I don't think they do actually)

Likewise Farage who has recently been promoted from person of interest to someone being actively investigated by the Muller inquiry 

Speaking in the abstract I can think of several reasons for buying depleted diamond mines in Africa.

1. You are getting diamonds somewhere else and what you need is a way of explaining them.

2. You want to roll up the diamond mining with a lot of other businesses to make a company that appears to be worth much more than the component parts cost you and can get listed on the stock exchange or sold at a profit.   

3. You are buying empty mines for more than they are worth because you need to give someone money for something else in a way that can be explained in your books.

3. You really want to mine diamonds and you are either stupid or have some breakthrough technology.

I think it's suspicious when someone with a dubious business history and alleged ties to Russia suddenly goes from struggling to keep his companies afloat to rolling in money and buying all kinds of strange unrelated businesses after making the largest donation in British political history to finance a cause which advances the strategic interests of Russia.

Perhaps is is more to do with 'kompromat' than a well executed plan to break sanctions.

If the plausible deniability part of Brexit funding has been well thought about, there may not be an obvious smoking gun. Banks could play a key part in outing the sources of the money. If he were involved in a criminal diamond smuggling scheme, it may be that he is less eager to spill the beans.

Obviously, I'm not suggesting that someone who has been caught telling fibs to the public would be involved in any criminal activity.   

I think between us all we have the basis for a fantastic thriller

But is Banks a dashing, James Bond like, international man of mystery or more Johnny English?

Perhaps he's a not so super villain and can't afford a lair under a volcano, so is using a disused diamond mine. 

I think the implication is that a lucky find in a cheaply bought diamond mine would be a convenient way to launder a very large payment with low losses and low risk of it being physically provable. Especially so where the paymaster does not actually have to leave a paper trail by buying the seeded diamonds. Plus of course the bonus investment fraud possibilities of a newly productive duff mine. So basically, yes. Also it's less tempting to cut a deal to reveal the source of the funds when you're absolutely up to your neck in it, potentially facing extradition to somewhere not very nice to face more charges.

Of course that would almost certainly break several laws so that won't be it. I'm sure there's good reason for branching out of mismanaging insurance companies into buying tired African diamond mines. Maybe he just likes a flutter or fancied a relaxing retirement project in the sun.

jk

Certainly an salivating prospect to keep the news interesting. Could be the scandal of our times!

Although the way the Russians deal with enemies of the state, I would be surprised if he would think cutting any sort of deal would be worth it to reveal any illegality with the Kremlin 

It should certainly do so if Theresa May blocked a request by the security services to investigate him in the run up to the referendum.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/02/theresa-may-arron-banks-lea...

Are you thinking of changing your name, so people won't think you're connected?

Neither? I've got him down as one of those greedy, amoral turds that one comes across in the financial service industry. A shirt stuffed full of bullshit and bluster with no ones interests at heart other than his own.

<Are you thinking of changing your name, so people won't think you're connected?>

A sort of veggie wheeler-dealer, sleazeball?

Who are you connected to, Philip Green or Aaron Banks?

Very good. Differences are that my 'Remain' vote clearly had less impact than Bank's activities (allegedly) and I don't (yet) have a superyacht like Green

He’s been invited onto the Andrew Marr show for a bit of free PR at licence-payers’ expense. I wonder if Harvey Weinstein will be on next week to proclaim his innocence?

Ah - Andrew eh? That'll be Theresa's mate. Closing ranks then? They'll be planning that gig at Chequers this weekend. Maybe Philip Greenwill add his expertise too. Couldn't make this farce up. Had this been a Labour administration it would've drowned months ago.

It appears an urgent question has been raised in parliament to the prime minister about whether she blocked an investigation into banks as home secretary...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-jenna-corderoy/b...

We'll need to wait for the outcome of this - maybe we'll have a better picture on Tuesday - but right now it's looking like those who are putting their fingers in their ears and trying to suppress all talk of the referendum result not being fair or representative, are pretty close to seeking to actively suppress the democratic voice of the nation.

If there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow I might understand the temptation to do that, but for almost all Brexit voters the expert opinion is aligned into near certainty that their personal prospects - along with those of the nation as a whole - will be damaged rather than improved.

< He’s been invited onto the Andrew Marr >

And presented a blusteringly flaccid response to some of the key questions - trying to deflect by implying that his (alleged) wrongdoing was only exposed because of political (Remain) motivation.

His insurance 'company'? I wouldn't even insure the content of my wheely-bin there.

Seems he's a remoaner now.  Funny old world.

This is a quote from the Guardian coverage, “The money came from Rock Services, which was a UK limited company. It was generated out of insurance business written in the UK,” Banks said. “Contrary to some of the press reports … we turn over £250m of premium, it’s a sizeable business.”

Yet in around 2 minutes I find that in 2017 the company turned over £50 million (with costs of £50 million so an operating profit of a mere £47,000), the figures for 2016 are £39 million with an operating loss of £316,000. From Companies House search (sorry url is too long to post).

Someone is telling massive porkies.

Edited after checking the 2015 figures and the operating profit was £21,000 on turnover of under £40 million.

Maybe he will be exposed as being as good a liar as those two Russians who said they just wanted to see Salisbury Cathedral. Twice.

Welcome to the Weimar Republic, or are we in the Balkans?

This is possible; hidden in there could have been marketing / political donations. However, a few mins on co's house shows you a linked company called "Better for the Country Ltd".........Directors Banks and Bilney. It is a bit of a web though, and interesting to note an interco debtor >£7m. There are also 2 related insurance co's with t/o reaching almost £80m.

So, he could be telling the truth...........but its well hidden. I havent gone all forensic on it, but on the face of it, it could be kosher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arron_Banks

His career started with nicking lead from the school roof and selling it.   Got expelled from 3 schools.  He's got 37 companies listed in the UK using variant spellings of his name.  An offshore company which finds 77 million quid to prop up other parts of his empire.  Banned from office in his own insurance company by regulators in Gibralter.   Track record of lawsuits and accusations from people who have bought businesses from him at questionable valuations.  Accused of stealing intellectual property and using it to set up a competitive business by a former business that he sold.   Says he ran a division of Norwich Union and worked for Berkshire Hathaway - they say he didn't.    Links to Russia and a big house in South Africa to run away to.   Mentioned in the Panama papers for one of his offshore 'enterprises'.   

The technical term for people with that kind of resume is shady as f*ck.   They could be telling the truth but it's far more likely they are lying about 10x as much stuff as you currently suspect.

Theresa May has a lot of explaining to do if someone in the security services suggested he should be investigated before the EU referendum and she blocked it.  And the security services have a lot of explaining to do if they didn't want to investigate a dodgy businessman with links to Russia spending money on an unprecedented scale to influence a referendum of this importance.

Agree entirely with your character assessment; there simply isn't any need to set up such a web of interrelated companies unless you are trying to hide something. 

I think your last paragraph alludes to what will / should create the biggest stink; why on earth TM blocked the investigation should be made clear, as the alternative, allowing it, would cause no harm to the government, and only potentially some embarrassment to the security services if he was found to be legit. In fact I'd go further and say it would cause no embarrassment. Whoever thought investigation was merited need only report "sorry, nothing doing, we've investigated and can't find anything dodgy". i.e. they were only doing their job. If the blocking of such an investigation requires the intervention of the home secretary, then there must be a bloody good reasons for it.

Add this to his palmarès:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2799090/millionaire-ukip-donor-arr...

£135k fine to begin with; probably more serious stuff to come in the weeks/months ahead

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46109883

It certainly appears that Eldon staff were working for Leave.EU, which would be a breach of electoral law.

Hardly likely to affect him or deter this behaviour unfortunately.