AN academic accused of interfering in the US election by offering information about Russian "dirt" on Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump's aides has resigned from his role with a Scottish university.
Joseph Mifsud, who was a teaching fellow in the politics department at Stirling University, quit weeks after he was named as the mysterious professor in US court documents, placing him at the centre of an international scandal over Kremlin meddling in last year's presidential election campaign.
It was alleged that he acted as a gobetween for Moscow by detailing "thousands of emails" about Mrs Clinton to George Papadopoulos, then a foreign policy adviser on the Trump campaign, during meetings in London last year.
The university, which said Professor Mifsud had been employed full-time since May but had had a relationship with the institution since at least 2014, confirmed that he had resigned last Thursday, but refused to give further details. His staff profile has been deleted from the university's website.
According to the court documents, the academic, who was not named but Professor Mifsud had since admitted is him, is described as having "substantial connections with Russian government officials" and to have tried to help arrange a meeting between the Trump campaign and the government in Moscow.
Later in the campaign, embarrassing hacked emails from figures in the Democratic Party including John Podesta, who served as Mrs Clinton's campaign chairman, were released by Wikileaks. Russian agents are suspected to have stolen the emails.
READ MORE: Did a Stirling professor play matchmaker between Putin and Trump?
Speaking to an Italian newspaper last month, Professor Mifsud said: "I have not got any secrets. I am a Democrat and a Hillary Clinton supporter. I am supposed to have offered mud that I collected from the Russians that they had on Hillary? That's a joke."
A university spokesman said: "Professor Mifsud is no longer employed by the university following his resignation on November 23, 2017."
Professor Mifsud could not be reached for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article