Yanukovych Or How The EU, Manafort And Hillary Might Bleed Because Of Trump

Mainstream has often rambled on about how former Ukrainian president Yanukovych was a Russian stooge. The single result which is linked proves exemplary but some Google queries easily show how the international corporate press portrayed him back in 2014. I do not need to dwell on it. You clicked the link, you are reading this and you more than likely remember the coverage.

The guest piece written below offers some new insights in who Mr. Yanukovych really was. A surmise, almost anecdotal take using a series of observations for you to #makupyourownmind with.

Who was Yanukovych? Who was Paul Manafort? What was the EU’s and Obama’s role leading to 2014 Maidan?

Here goes. Credits to the original author. Edits for readability.

Yanukovych’s 2010 presidential election campaign was managed by Paul Manafort (THE Paul Manafort). During the campaign and later during Yanukovich’s presidency, Manafort constantly consulted with the American embassy in Kiev, and advised Yanukovich on policy matters. Manafort – in other words – was OBAMA’S AGENT.

Yanukovych was chosen because he was able to attract voters not only in western and central Ukraine, but also in Donbass, and thus gain a comfortable “democratic” legitimacy. His task, in close cooperation with Manafort, was to prepare and implement the notorious EU Association Agreement.

The goal of this EU Association Agreement was to provide the EU with a sneaky way to gain access to the markets of the CIS countries, including Russia. The increased profits from European exports were to compensate for the effects of Obama’s TTIP, which, contrary to EU propaganda, would entail serious economic losses for the EU. The EU Association Agreement with Ukraine was Obama’s plan to compensate for this, in order to get Europe to agree to the signing of the TTIP.

Yanukovych was chosen because he was able to attract voters not only in western and central Ukraine, but also in Donbass.

The “problem” arose when the Russian government warned Yanukovych that the Assocation Agreement, as dictated by the EU, would provide the EU access to the CIS markets without having to pay import taxes, and that Yanukovych should renegotiate the agreement to make it more balanced – in other words, to make it a “two way agreement” instead of a one way profit machine for the EU.

The second “problem” arose when Yanukovych’s Prime Minister, Nikolay Azarov – an expert in economy and financial figures – began calculating the effects of the Association Agreement, as dictated by the EU, on the Ukrainian economy, and established beyond doubt that it would cause huge losses and possibly the collapse of the Ukrainian economy.

In 2013, Azarov was visited by then European Commissioner for Trade, Karel De Gucht. Azarov proposed De Gucht a number of Ukrainian products which could be exported to the EU, this also to balance the trade turnover between Ukraine and the EU. De Gucht categorically said NO to everything. In other words, the EU wanted to make profits by exporting to Ukraine, and through Ukraine to the CIS, but refused to import products in return.

In early november 2013, Azarov presented his findings and his well documented economic calculations to the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament), to the members of parliament, most of which had extensive business interests in Ukraine. It was the Parliament that voted against the signing of the Association Agreement (so, in essence, some actual democracy at work), which left Yanukovich no other option than to postpone the signing and go try to renegotiate it.

It was at that moment that some “student protests” were organised on the Maidan Square, and when, after a couple of days, the students simply went home, CIA-backed Nazi-affiliated, openly fascist gangs were sent to replace them, to violently provoke the police and the security forces, and ultimately wage a violent street war which led to the coup on 22 February 2014.

The Ukrainian citizens who stood alongside the Nazis on Maidan, were just “furniture”, a bunch of idiots who believed the fairy tale that they would get European living standards and luxury thanks to the Association Agreement (which, of course, had already been refuted by Azarov’s calculations, which apart from some businessmen in Parliament, nobody wanted to hear).

The “leaders” of the Maidan insurgency were a mixture of hardcore Nazis like Andrey Parubiy and Oleg Tyagnybok as well as pro-American puppets like Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Petro Poroshenko and Vitaliy Klitshko.

To return to the topic of Paul Manafort : what was the REAL reason why he was punished ?

Because, as an independent consultant, he had the nerve to go work for the Trump campaign. The court case against Manafort was simple REVENGE.

The “leaders” of the Maidan insurgency were a mixture of hardcore Nazis like Andrey Parubiy and Oleg Tyagnybok as well as pro-American puppets like Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Petro Poroshenko and Vitaliy Klitshko.

The Ukrainian junta, brought to power by the Obama regime, was supported Hillary Clinton who during her campaign, quite litteraly, promised a war against Russia. That would not only fulfill the lifelong dream of her mate Soros, but also of the Ukrainian Nazis.

That is why Clinton was not only “helped” by descendants of the Ukrainian Nazi-diaspora WHO WORK IN HER TEAM to invent the “Russian hacking” and “Russian meddling” hoaxes, but also by the Ukrainian pro-regime parliamentarian Sergey Leshchenko who provided the Clinton gang with the – either fake or real – “black accounting” book of Yanukovich’s Party of Regions. This allegedly proves that Manafort received money which he didn’t declare to the American tax office.

Manafort NEVER had any ties to, nor contacts in Russia, as was falsely claimed by the Clinton gang. He worked for Obama’s “project Yanukovich” in Ukraine exclusively.

Trump very recently fired the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovich (also a descendant of the Ukrainian Nazi-diaspora), who was appointed by Obama to replace the 2014 coup-ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt.

Now that the notorious Mueller investigation failed to find any substantial proof for the “Russian meddling”, Trump is going to dig into the 2016 UKRAINIAN MEDDLING, for which he WILL find plenty of hard proof.

We can expect that he will hit back very hard.

Let’s hope he pulls it off.