Donald Trump's lawyer, and other behind the scenes conspirators, slipped Mike Flynn a plan to lift sanctions against Russia before he was fired.

Trump and his attorney, Michael Cohen.

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

A week before Michael T. Flynn resigned as national security adviser, a sealed proposal was hand-delivered to his office, outlining a way for President Trump to lift sanctions against Russia. 

Mr. Flynn is gone, having been caught lying about his own discussion of sanctions with the Russian ambassador. But the proposal, a peace plan for Ukraine and Russia, remains, along with those pushing it: Michael D. Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, who delivered the document; Felix H. Sater, a business associate who helped Mr. Trump scout deals in Russia; and a Ukrainian lawmaker trying to rise in a political opposition movement shaped in part by Mr. Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. 

At a time when Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia, and the people connected to him, are under heightened scrutiny — with investigations by American intelligence agencies, the F.B.I. and Congress — some of his associates remain willing and eager to wade into Russia-related efforts behind the scenes. 

You might remember that Michael Cohen was featured prominently in the famous dossier put together by the former MI-6 agent.

And now here he is again mentioned in a article about pushing a policy that would benefit Russia.

And exactly HOW did Cohen and his cohorts plan to provide an incentive to get Americans to go along with the idea of removing sanctions against a country that just hacked our election?

By convincing Russia to pull out of Ukraine.

And how would they do that?

By first removing the current anti-Russian leader of Ukraine, and replacing him with a more pro-Russia leader:

But the proposal contains more than just a peace plan. Andrii V. Artemenko, the Ukrainian lawmaker, who sees himself as a Trump-style leader of a future Ukraine, claims to have evidence — “names of companies, wire transfers” — showing corruption by the Ukrainian president, Petro O. Poroshenko, that could help oust him. And Mr. Artemenko said he had received encouragement for his plans from top aides to Mr. Putin. 

“A lot of people will call me a Russian agent, a U.S. agent, a C.I.A. agent,” Mr. Artemenko said. “But how can you find a good solution between our countries if we do not talk?”

So if Trump facilitates, or at least ignores, a plan to overthrow the Ukrainian government, then Russia will pull their troops out of the area, and that will give Trump the ammunition he needs to justify removing those irritating sanctions against Russia and make his boyfriend Vladimir Putin very happy with him.

Okay so HOW exactly did this Artemenko fellow get his hands on this supposedly career ending information?

Well how does Russia typically get dirt on their political adversaries?

By hacking I would assume.

So this could yet be another case of Trump associates promoting the idea of using hacked information to destroy a political career so that they can manipulate a situation to favor their agenda.

Gee, where have we seen that before?

For his part Michael Cohen is doing damage control and has changed a key part of the story.

Courtesy of WaPo: 

Cohen, speaking with The Post on Sunday, acknowledged that the meeting took place and that he had left with the peace proposal in hand. 

But Cohen said he did not take the envelope to the White House and did not discuss it with anyone. He called suggestions to the contrary “fake news.” 

“I acknowledge that the brief meeting took place, but emphatically deny discussing this topic or delivering any documents to the White House and/or General Flynn,” Cohen said. He said he told the Ukrainian official that he could send the proposal to Flynn by writing him at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

I am not too sure how that really exonerates Cohen, but for their part the Times is standing by their initial reporting.

Gee who to believe. The slimy attorney for one of the most duplicitous human beings on the planet, or the New York Times?

Yep, that's a tough one alright.