Darth Omar
Russian asset
Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.
Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.
A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.
The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia. But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
____________
This Politico article from 2017 tells of *collusion* between the Ukraine and the DNC before the election of 2016.
Predictably, Politico soft-peddles it by comparing it to Russian collusion. But collusion is either always illegal or it isn’t. It’s also notable that the Ukrainians were instrumental in throwing Manafort under the bus as a means to advance the narrative that the Trump campaign was heavily involved with the Russians prior to the election.
Now we know that was just an empty narrative aka a lie.
But the bigger question is why isn’t this a big story? Why was Ukrainian/DNC collusion allowed to wither on the vine?
Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.
A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.
The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia. But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
____________
This Politico article from 2017 tells of *collusion* between the Ukraine and the DNC before the election of 2016.
Predictably, Politico soft-peddles it by comparing it to Russian collusion. But collusion is either always illegal or it isn’t. It’s also notable that the Ukrainians were instrumental in throwing Manafort under the bus as a means to advance the narrative that the Trump campaign was heavily involved with the Russians prior to the election.
Now we know that was just an empty narrative aka a lie.
But the bigger question is why isn’t this a big story? Why was Ukrainian/DNC collusion allowed to wither on the vine?