Former Donald Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone has settled a defamation suit seeking $100 million in damages filed by a Chinese businessman who he claimed had violated U.S. election law by making a donation to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Fox News informed.
In a document filed in Florida federal court on Monday, Stone said he “retracts, and apologizes for statements” he made about Guo Wengui on the conspiracy website InfoWars earlier this year. Stone said that Guo, who also goes by the name Miles Kwok, is a “turncoat criminal who is convicted of crimes here and in China.” Stone also said Guo was financing a presidential run by former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon and had made donations to the Clinton campaign with which he violated the federal law that prevents foreign nationals from donating to political campaigns.
In the settlement deal, Stone stated that “all of these statements are not true” and said he “improperly relied upon information conveyed to me by Sam Nunberg.”
An attorney tied to Nunberg did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.
As part of the agreement, Stone is required to publish a statement of retraction on InfoWars, as well as his personal Facebook and Instagram accounts and his website, StoneZone.com. He is also required to run ads carrying the statement in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. In exchange, Guo will drop his lawsuit.
Guo, who made his fortune in real estate, left China in 2014 and is living in self-imposed exile in the U.S. He has used social media to accuse senior Chinese officials of corruption, claims that have outraged Beijing. He applied for political asylum in the U.S. last year.
Stone, 66, has been under investigation for months by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is attempting to determine what knowledge Stone may have had about plans by WikiLeaks to release emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta in the weeks before the election. Stone repeatedly has claimed he had no inside knowledge about the content, source or timing of WikiLeaks’ disclosure.