Someone please explain to me:
What's the deal with Lytvyn? Is he being considered as a potential coalition ally? Or not anymore, now that Moroz seems to be out?
Because if he is, isn't it somewhat fucked up?
Here's a leaflet I've photographed today at Livoberezhna, underneath the metro bridge:
It seems to be one of Lytvyn's campaign statements, addressed to the Kyiv folks. In what looks like lipstick, someone wrote over the thing, in Russian:Gong[adze]'s Killer
A little bit more on Lytvyn's alleged involvement in Gongadze's disappearance is here
And there's something else, too. We all know that "the country needs Lytvyn" - that ad was all over the city. But this leaflet also says that "Kyiv needs Chernovetskyi" - and that some "political forces" are pushing for the mayor's resignation, and that Lytvyn's Bloc has always been on Chernovetsky's side, and that Chernovetskyi's not gonna "do harm to anyone" - and so Lytvyn's Bloc is planning to start collecting signatures in support of our poor, beleaguered mayor.
I thought Lutsenko - with his "I don't promise, I guarantee" bravado - was against Chernovetskyi.
I hope they'll somehow manage without Lytvyn. Otherwise, it all seems kind of pointless, once again.Update
: Or is this leaflet a fake? As recently as Sept. 28, Lytvyn's Bloc complained about brudni tekhnologii
("dirty technologies") being used against them (here
, in Ukrainian)...
If he's not a fan of Chernovetskyi, then teaming up with him wouldn't be such an absurd thing to do, after all.
As for Gongadze, it's been seven years now, and hardly anyone remembers the details of the case. And no one really expects Yushchenko to solve it anymore. They'll find a way out for Lytvyn, I'm sure.Another update
: It is a fake. But it failed to hurt them bad enough, obviously...
Here's a comment from an anonymous reader:
The leaflet which you photographed was shown on 5kanal interview show on October 2nd, and Oleh Zar[u]binsky [...] of Lytvyn Bloc stated that was black PR and then went on to state - we know who printed where etc. but would not state any name or party connected to it.