I wish Wikileaks could publish some Russians whistle-blower information from times to times.

Are you unhappy that Poroshenko was an informant to the U.S. embassy. Should the papers not report about it?

how much of a US puppet he is.

The UA revolution stinks to high heavens and it has our name on it.

Not that you're responsible for the headline Judi Lynn but the sources for this story are State Department cables. No claim is being made here by Wikileaks. Wikileaks did not "say" anything about Poroshenko. Everyone with Internet access is free to locate documents that mention Poroshenko in the SIPRNET cache of 250,000 State Department cables, which Wikileaks released in 2010. I wish media would finally start labeling these sources accurately, as classified U.S. government documents.

Citing Wikileaks as the source reduces the credibility of the content in the story. I think this journalistic practice is probably inadvertent, but it's an interesting point you make.

cables.

At the time, people, including the Secretary of State, said that it included raw information including anything people in the country told our embassy staff. Every embassy from every country is there to know what is going on in that country. In addition, various Congressmen and Senators on oversight committees also visit countries and are accompanied by embassy staff and they write raw reports on that contact which are sent to State Department. (Many papers pulled the Wikileaks reports on their local representatives - as the Boston Globe did with Kerry - where, in his case, what he said behind closed doors was consistent with what he said in SFRC hearings.)

What I see is that this is Russia trying to discredit the new President. The question I would ask is what he did as an "informant"? It sounds like he candidly spoke with the diplomat about others in the coalition. It seems to me that, at least on JT, he was correct if he said she was corrupt. Is every member of the opposition or the president's party who is willing to speak to the US embassy an "informant"? Would you argue that the sole purpose of an embassy is to be there for US travelers - in case of trouble?

Note also that the diplomat who spoke to him, wrote that he did not believe him. That had already been reported weeks ago to suggest that he was not trustworthy. The cable was a raw report, written by someone at the embassy. At the time of Wikileaks making this public, what the government said was these were RAW INPUT that the State Department put together with other information to have an understanding of who important people are. One concern was that it would endanger any people who spoke candidly to our representatives in countries where doing that (most of the Middle East for instances) was not without risk.

The fact is that this story shows why Wikileaks was not helpful when they dumped all those cables. If you remember, there were some immediately highlighted because they were obviously not accurate. The spin by Wikileaks supporters was that this was what the State Department believed, which was never the case.

...whether we realize it or not.

- K&R

The Candy man can ...the candy man can ...gum drops bars anything you want...

I'm sure we'll be hearing very soon how the May 25th election was supposedly staged. Just...because.

Unsurprising.

So how do I know what I'm avoiding?

Poroshenko acting as an informant to the U.S. State Department. But I assumed you can read that already.

How does it relate to 2014 exactly?