"Muh" Narrative and Proxy Vendettas

This is a VERY big deal and an important piece of the geopolitical puzzle.
The more the Trump/Russia saga unfurls, the more we learn about old vendettas among rival intel communities, their agents, political strategists for hire, their clients in various countries, and the relentless lust for the power of payback.
https://www.justice.gov/…/prominent-global-law-firm-agrees-…
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom, LLP, was the law firm hired to advise a private Ukrainian businessman and hired to conduct public relations on behalf of The Ukraine. Paul Manafort brokered the deal. The transaction occurred during 2012 and was most active surrounding the Romney election of 2012 but the investigation by the FBI extended into 2013, although the investigation was dropped…. because Skadden lied to the FBI.
Skadden just agreed to pay a 4.6 million dollar fine (return of all fees received via Manafort, to DOJ) for not registering for FARA as “agent of Putin’s forces working in The Ukraine.”
But – Manafort hired them, so “agent of Putin” is misleading.
The charge against Skadden by DOJ is for working as an agent of The Ukraine government. (Note, not Russia)
<Snip>
“According to the Agreement, in the spring of 2012, Ukraine, Ministry of Justice (MOJ), with the assistance of Paul Manafort, hired Skadden to write a report (Report) on the evidence and procedures used during the 2011 prosecution and trial of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and to address various questions regarding its fairness. Skadden also agreed to advise Ukraine in connection with a second, potential future prosecution of Tymoshenko.”
The agreement Skadden entered into, to provide the report, said they would be paid approx. $12,000, yet Skadden understood it would be paid by a private Ukrainian businessman, who was a client of Paul Manafort, via a Cyprus bank account which was controlled by Manafort…., or Rick Gates (according to recall of Gates’ testimony).
In fact, Skadden eventually received $4,657,568.91 for legal work. According to the DOJ, Skadden learned AFTER (allegedly) they were hired, the report they were producing was to be used to influence public opinion, Congress, Obama White House, on issues in the Ukraine. Yet,
Skadden did not register for FARA,
Skadden continued to work on the report,
Skadden contacted journalists without mentioning the source of their fees,
when questioned by the FARA unit at DOJ, a partner at Skadden’s lied and misled the FBI, both in oral questioning and written documents in 2012-2013,
Skadden’s other partners were deemed negligent,
and yes, prior to release of the report, Skadden contacted journalists and urged journalists for positive press (but against the narrative our MSM already established in agreement with intel sources).
Skadden’s senior partner, and the firm, walk away on a BLATANT FARA violation AND lying to the FBI, while Manafort sits in solitary confinement.
Double standard?
Sound familiar?
Does it sound like ‘reports’ or a ‘dossier’ obtained by the FBI under McCabe/Baker and then selectively leaked to the press to influence public opinion?
Or worse, influence the public and smear a particular person?
Or an attempt to influence a Presidential election?
Or a sitting President of the United States of America?
Sounds like a MILD version of what Fusion GPS did with Perkins Coie/DNC/Clinton campaign, with the help of the FBI and DOJ.
Is this kind of smear common?
Do we remember, over Thanksgiving 2018, when a government report on climate change was issued and President Trump responded, “I don’t believe it”, and the media spasmed?
Did you know two of the sources in the report were paid by outside entities and quite radical in their beliefs? Did it bother our government bureaucrats or the public that the sources and their motivations behind the report were not fully disclosed?
Perhaps, when reports are issued, by our government or private law firms, we should look more closely at the sources and who is paying for the sources.
But back to Manafort and the vendettas among spy agencies because it’s much more interesting.
Understand, Manfort consulted for the Regions Party in The Ukraine. He went in to help, then Prime Minister Yanukovych.
Yanukovych ran for President in 2004, polls had him down by double digits, yet he won by three points, which led to charges of voter fraud.
Government ordered a do-over election and Yanukovych called Manafort to help. Between the election and the re-election (November of 2004 – January of 2005), the ORANGE Revolution appeared, with massive protests, orange flags, co-led by Yulia Tymoshenko.
The Orange Revolution was thought (strongly suspected) to have significant help from the American CIA, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution
As well as public support and suspected back-door support from John McCain and his allies in government and media.
Let’s not forget the McCain, Rick Davis, Oleg Deripaska connection back to the 2008 election. These boys perfected the plan. https://www.thenation.com/article/mccains-kremlin-ties/
And yes, Rick Davis used to be a partner to ………, Manafort.
See the picture? We have one political party on the western side of the country, allegedly supported (strongly suspected) by American CIA and John McCain cronies versus the other political party, whose campaign manager is Paul Manafort.
Could it be, THIS sets up the motivation for the battle we are seeing NOW and WHY Mueller so fiercely went after Manafort?
The same guys have been fighting the same political/power struggle across the globe for the past 20 years or longer.
Yanukovych lost the re-election of 2004 (actually held in January of 2005) but Manafort stayed to help the party in the elections of 2006.
Regions Party, which was Yanukovych/Manafort won in 2006.
Regions Party was predominant in a section of Eastern Ukraine, Russian speaking – thus characterized by our press/intel community as “Putin-backed-thugs”. The Regions Party may have been backed by Russian oligarchs or it could be characterized as Wall Street versus Main Street in American vernacular. Keep in mind, we are viewing the history through the lens of our MSM which is strongly influenced by our intel community, especially the (alleged) CIA, which allegedly had a stake in the fight, for good or bad.
NOTHING to suggest it was the ‘evil’ Putin, yet.
Manafort knew, however, the polls on the ground during 2006, indicated a large majority of ALL Ukrainians (west and east or left/right) were opposed to joining NATO. So, Yanukovych campaigned on an Anti-NATO stance. It’s disputed whether this was Manafort’s idea or not.
Whoever had the idea, it worked in 2006. Regions Party won.
We also know, Manafort set up shop in Brussels (later on) to appeal to NATO for Ukrainian Membership.
Both sides of the same coin, perhaps. Yet, it appears Yanukovych campaigned on a popularly held stance of most Ukrainians – NO NATO.
Beyond the NATO issue, from NBC: “Manafort recommended “strategy and messaging,” he said, “especially as it related to the campaign and fulfillment of campaign promises.” The party’s political campaigns, said the spokesman, were “built on a foundation of economic recovery and building a relationship with the West that supported and focused on Ukraine being a part of the European Union.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/…/what-did-ex-trump-aide-paul-manaf…
Gee whiz, that doesn’t fit the CIA (alleged)or MSM narrative, does it?
In 2007, Yanukovych ran for Prime Minister again. He was seen in Germany advocating for EU membership but appeared in The Ukraine as opposed to NATO membership.
Weird, eh?
Sound like a politician?
Yanukovych lost in 2007.
Enter Yulia Tymoshenko, female, blond, attractive. Yulia was Prime Minister, briefly in 2005 (because of the Orange Revolution and she was favored by our intel community and McCain – along with the MSM), but re-elected from 2007-2010.
In 2005, Forbes listed her as the 3rd most powerful woman in the world.
As we can see by the timelines, Yanukovych and Yulia keep trading places for leadership of The Ukraine.
Sounds like the Bush and Clinton families.
OR, more like a fight between CIA (alleged)/McCain forces versus Manafort and his political party, The Regions.
It was a pitched political battle.
Keep in mind, Yulia is the one who co-led the Orange Revolution in 2004 which nudged Yanukovych out of power in 2005 and beat Yanukovych in 2007.
Yulia was pro-EU but opposed their customs union (tariff and regulations – gee, there’s a surprise) and wanted The Ukraine to enter NATO.
Here is her Wikipedia page link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulia_Tymoshenko
In late 2010, she lost the election to …. guess who?
Yanukovych, helped by Manafort.
In 2011, Yulia Tymoshenko was charged and convicted with embezzlement and abuse of power (sounds like Hillary), but the charges were thought to be politically motivated (sounds like the press defending Yulia). Or, was Yanukovych the evil player and was Yulia innocent?
Yanukovych, still helped by Manafort, sought out the help of American law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, in 2012, to create a report (review the case to give it legitimacy or not) on the charges against Yulia and the possibility of more charges…..
…. which is how Skadden became involved and why Skadden struck a deal, to pay $4,657,568.91 in a penalty, to the DOJ today.
Petro Poroshenko won the election in 2014.
It is interesting to reiterate the Skadden law firm pays a fee and walks away with reputation intact.
Manafort sits in solitary confinement, smeared as a traitor to the country.
Payback is hell.