Poroshenko gave Cohen Secret Payment of $400,000 for Access to Trump

in informationwar •  5 months ago

by revoltingpeasant 1 June 2K18

According to a BBC report Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko paid US President Donald Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen $400,000 to set up 'back-channel' talks between himself and Trump. Cohen is not registered as a Ukrainian agent under FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act).

Poroshenko and Trump.jpg
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and US President Donald Trump
photo from BBC

A senior Kiev intelligence officer said that convicted mobster and former Trump business partner Felix Sater helped Cohen set up the meeting.

At the time the Ukrainian National Anti Corruption Bureau was investigating Trump's past campaign manager Paul Manafort after Manafort was headlined in the New York Times as having received millions of dollars from Russian interests. Subsequent to the meeting between Poroshenko and Trump, Ukraine dropped its investigation of Manafort although it isn't clear if there is a connection.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  
·

This is crazy complicated.
I tried to do a transfer to dustaweeper but it didn't happen. All the steem and steempower and SBD isn't making sense to me.I don't want to learn another language, I just want to write.

·
·

That's fine...wasn't trying to force you into anything, but it's definitely in your interest to have this account. I have one myself and it works amazing. Go and read the dustsweeper manual again, it works. I did it!

·
·
·

@palikari123, please don't think that I don't appreciate what you have done here. I do, and thank you, again.

I'm dealing with life stuff right now, and it's a drain on my time and resources. I'm frustrated because it gets in the way of things that I want to do, including writing articles for Steemit. Within the last couple of days I had ideas for several stories and actually started work on two, but they may never get finished because of distractions, and timeliness often equals relevancy. So when I get further obstructed by my ignorance of how Steemit functions, it adds to the frustration.

RE Steemit, I'm really getting into the community; the platform can be a bit of a clunker at times.

I'm clearly influenced by the ubiquitous point and click GUIs. However, anything that takes additional effort to interact with also has a time cost - I just want to write.
As everywhere the bottom line is money. I resent it, while living in a society completely constrained by it.
I don't know what I despise more: money, or not having it when I need it.

Anyway, earlier I transferred a third of my account to dustsweeper, I think it was 0.042, hopefully that'll do in the short term. I can do more if needed.

·
·
·
·

RE "I just want to write", and "frustration"

To help you understand my frustration: I recently posted five articles in one 24 hour period. They didn't ultimately post as being within one day - possibly due to time zones?

I started with a couple that I was already working on then spent the next 24 hours completing those and writing new ones. The last submission was a racing the clock; got in with seconds to spare. That total shift was well over a 30 hours.

The last several days - zero stories.

·
·
·
·
·

Well, there isn't a need to post to any cut off times (if I'm understanding you correctly here). There also isn't any requirement for a certain amount of posts per day or week. It's really up to you what you want to do with your account, and how you want to interact with the interface and your followers. Personally, I don't even post daily or to any schedule/time.

·
·
·
·
·
·

"Personally, I don't even post daily or to any schedule/time"

A man of my own sentiments

·
·
·
·

I know you appreciate it, no problem there:) With regards to how steemit works, we were all like you not that long ago. I do suggest that you hold onto some of the earnings you get from your posts, and re-invest it into your account by either using it to top up your dustsweeper account or by increasing your vote power by powering up. We can leave that for another time!

·
·
·
·
·

Unrelated question: what is the etiquette regarding upvoting your own work? I avoid that, it seems somewhat as blowing your own horn. But I see others doing it.
What are your thoughts?

·
·
·
·
·
·

There are mixed feeling on that, but I would say that the overwhelming majority of users do upvote their own posts. It's not against the rules anyway, so ultimately it becomes your choice.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

That's what I thought. So, I won't. If it's good, others will upvote it.

Although, if they don't see it, that can't happen.
And I'm still an uber noob about promoting my own stuff.

·
·

BTW it's not called dustasweeper. Are you sure you spelt the name correctly? That may be the reason why the transfer did not work. Make sure you follow their account @dustsweeper, and when you use the transfer feature you only need to put in the first few letters and the account name will appear in a list in the transfer wallet.

·
·
·

I think one of the problems is that my account is worth 37 cents; I don't have anything much to transfer.

·
·
·
·

Yes after looking at your account, that is definitely the case. At the moment though, because you won in the contest, you have a credit in your account balance of 0.500 sbd worth of dustsweeper upvotes. That should last you a reasonable amount of time. As you save some of your own sbd through authorship of your own articles, you will be able to refill your dustsweeper account as you go along. So you are all good for now. As your account balances reduces, you will receive notifications from dustsweeper to let you know when, you're account requires a refill.

·
·
·
·
·

'because you won in the contest'
Might be fun to see how that functioned :)

·
·
·
·
·
·

Here you go....now you will find out with my vote that doesn't pass the dust threshold. It will be upvoted on the 6th day by dustsweeper to make up the difference between whether you would have been payed out or not:)

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

I'm not about being paid; that was an attempt at humor.

Using the BBC for an source is great - if you want to support the
establishment perspective.

They are the propaganda arm of the UK government. (just so you know)

(Manafort only worked for trump for 49 days, btw.)

·

BBC the propaganda arm of the UK

Yes. Along with, directly or by proxy, the Independent, Guardian, and all the other trollops. I try to avoid giving oxygen to such, but sometimes they raise an issue relevant to my pursuits - and I credit sources regardless.

Another consideration, even the cesspools sometimes have an ethical individual working for them, and it's helpful to recognize them before they get axed. Also (rarely), an msm will get something right.
For example, here