Question for @NatashaBertrand, who retweeted this: doesn't this mean Rusal America was formed in April 2016, but no Kentucky filing was made until August 2018? As the Rusal sanctions weren't in place until April 2018, are we certain there's anything suspicious about this at all?
@NatashaBertrand 1/ In WA, the incorporation date is listed as February '18. What Scott posted may just mean Rusal America was unofficially formed in 2016 but not incorporated until later. It formed soon after Manafort joined Trump's campaign, but not sure that means much. opengovwa.com/corporation/60…
@NatashaBertrand 2/ Update: Scott says they incorporated in Delaware in 1999. So without more information on what precisely was "formed" in April 2016 (and where) I'm not sure an August 2018 filing in Kentucky, as Rusal and the feds were negotiating the dropping of sanctions on Rusal, means much.
@NatashaBertrand 3/ For all we know (without some expert eyes on this) all this means is that "Registered Agents, Inc." (Rusal's representative for purposes of this filing but not, apparently, part of or otherwise connected to Rusal or Rusal America) was formed in Kentucky (or generally) in 2016.
@NatashaBertrand 4/ From @dodger_lou, below, via the Kentucky SOS site, it seems Registered Agents, Inc. acted on behalf of Rusal America in Kentucky beginning April 2016, which suggests Rusal (which wasn't under sanctions until 2018) initiated its Kentucky plans during or before election season.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou 5/ So—as @ScottMStedman is intimating—this suggests a *possibility* Deripaska (who came to Rusal many years earlier) was infiltrating McConnell's office as he was infiltrating Trump's campaign (Spring '16) and Mitch might've had other motives to block Obama's statement on Russia.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 6/ Deripaska is Suspect #1 in Russian election collusion (on the Kremlin side); the evidence—from the Nastya Rybka chronicles to the activities of his plane before/after the election, from Manafort-Kilimnik meetings to Boyarkin's threats against Manafort—is becoming overwhelming.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 7/ That said, we needn't assume incipient Rusal outreach to Kentucky—which may/may not have reached McConnell's ears by spring 2016Z—was the basis for McConnell blocking Obama from warning America about Russian election interference. It also could've been "simple" dirty politics.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 8/ A reason for caution is a) Trump was the only GOP primary candidate who favored dropping all sanctions on Russia; b) Rusal wasn't sanctioned until 2018; and c) #MoscowMitch didn't support Trump until he had to—so a McConnell/Russia plot in Spring '16 makes somewhat less sense.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 9/ So what Scott found gives—with more investigation—#MoscowMitch good reason to feel warmth toward Russia by 2016 at least, and to support lifting sanctions on Rusal in late '18/early '19, but isn't necessarily evidence of criminally conspiratorial conduct (versus realpolitik).
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 10/ The most compelling end of this is Deripaska's: he was seeking to insinuate himself in American politics in any way possible, and the culmination of *one* of his angles on that score—getting a presence in the home state of #MoscowMitch—*culminated* in early '16 at the latest.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 11/ It's in early February '16 that Manafort tells Barrack "I have to get to Trump"; as soon as he's hired, he communicates to Deripaska agents he's in his role to make them happy. So we likely need to set the clock on Deripaska's in-roads into US politics in *'15* at the latest.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 12/ Why does that matter? Well, the *latest* date we have for Flynn communicating directly to Putin that the "grand bargain" can be accomplished via Trump is early December 2015. So Deripaska being ready to start moving his pieces onto the board by then at the latest makes sense.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 13/ It's 120 days from Flynn/his son's secret visit with Russian ambassador Kislyak at his DC home to illegally negotiate U.S. foreign policy under a prospective Trump administration to the date that Rusal America makes its presence felt in Kentucky (formation, not registration).
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 14/ 120 days seems a reasonable period from Flynn signaling Trump was on board with the "grand bargain" to Putin's agent Deripaska not just getting his former employee in place with Trump but also making inroads with others—like #MoscowMitch who could be pressed to support Trump.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman 15/ It was clear, between December 2015 and April 2016, that Republican leadership was *not* with Trump, *and* that Trump being the only GOP primary candidate with a plan to drop all Crimea sanctions (Rusal sanctions didn't exist yet). So getting to/toward #MoscowMitch was *key*.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman PS/ That's why I say the document Scott posted is helpful in establishing a timeline for Deripaska's investment in the Kremlin's interference plans, whose 2 phases began in 2014 and 2015 but which didn't—many don't realize this—turn to active support of *Trump* until spring 2016.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman PS2/ Remember, the Red Sea Conspiracy—the agreement by Russian allies in the Middle East (the leaders of 3 Sunni Arab nations in particular) to seek a "grand bargain" with Trump and Russia—was hatched in October/November 2015 on the Red Sea. Flynn headed to Russia *right after*.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman PS3/ A longstanding mystery has been that Putin planned to steal DNC data and engage in psy-ops on U.S. voters in 2014/early 2015, but when did he turn to *Trump*? Was it—in fact—once the "grand bargain" was set in fall 2015 (dovetailing with Flynn efforts that began June 2015)?
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman PS4/ If—as the evidence suggests—Deripaska was the key oligarch in Putin's *infiltration* plans (as opposed to hacking/psy-ops), the "grand bargain" theory of the case has Deripaska being ready to move on infiltrating Trump's campaign and #MoscowMitch in December '15/January '16.
@NatashaBertrand@dodger_lou@ScottMStedman PS5/ From that standpoint, Rusal America creating its Kentucky presence <60 days after Manafort tells Barrack he "has to get to Trump" makes a *lot* of sense. Whereas, in contrast, if Rusal America had shown up in Kentucky in (say) early 2013 it would've made little sense at all.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
(1) Trump and Epstein became friends in 1987, not 1990. The New York Times inexplicably cuts 3 years off their 17-plus-year friendship.
(2) Their friendship did *not* end because Epstein was a creep. It ended over a Florida real estate deal. nytimes.com/2025/07/19/us/…
To the credit of the NYT, it does eventually clarify Point #2 in the report.
I do wish it spent more time on the fact that an anonymous person dimed out Epstein after Trump got angry at Epstein over the real estate deal in 2004—and that Trump has a history of diming people out.
That question alone could change everything.
If in fact Trump extended his long history of being a disgusting snitch only when it personally benefits him by reporting Epstein to the police in 2004—or having an agent do it—it would confirm he knew exactly what Epstein was up to.
Everyone in America needs to read this FREE—I’ve gifted it below—report from the conservative WALL STREET JOURNAL about Trump and Epstein.
Apparently the president has now threatened to sue the WSJ over this 100% accurate report due to how damaging it is. wsj.com/politics/trump…
Holy actual literal shit OMG
By the way, the answer to the riddle in the note (in effect, “What do you get for men [Trump and Epstein] who have everything?”) is “You get them something one isn’t *allowed* to have.”
Trump then writes that he and Epstein have the thing they want in common—and it “never ages.”
Can I make the blindingly obvious observation that now that we know Trump and his crew doctored the Epstein video we can't possibly trust that anything else they release will be all they actually have?
Wouldn't you just assume documents are being *burned and shredded* right now?
Like aren't we actually past the point of no return here? The second we learned that they cut out 3 minutes from the Epstein video and tried to pass it off as a legitimate piece of evidence, wasn't that pretty much the end of any Epstein credibility for the whole administration?
You don't have to be a former federal investigator to know that every moment between the release of that fake video and the inevitable future decision by Trump to release "everything" was a moment that Trump goons at DOJ/FBI spent destroying evidence that didn't center Democrats
What would Trump do if this song went viral today?
WARNING: This song goes hard and makes no apologies.
LYRICS:
Gather round and I'll tell you of two Florida men
Who for twenty or so years were the best of friends
One of them ended up mysteriously dead
While the other one sleeps in a White House bed
I have no difficulty saying that Trump and Musk caused some of the 50+ flood deaths in Texas.
And here's why: these two men with no expertise in disaster preparedness were told not to cut the positions they cut, and were told people would die if they did.
And then people died.
Moreover, Democrats are never going to start winning elections again until they're willing to call a thing just what it is.
Texas Democrats should be clear and persistent in saying that public service cuts overseen by non-experts desperate for billionaire tax cuts killed people.
And if Republicans respond by saying that Democrats are politicizing these deaths, the Democrats should respond: THAT'S BECAUSE THE DEATHS ARE POLITICAL. POLITICIANS CAUSED THEM.
1/ If I had to rank by how annoying they are the false narratives I hear folks who don't study these men professionally advancing, the claim that the Feud is fake would easily rank #1.
There's *no evidence whatsoever* substantiating the claim that any part of the Feud is fake.
2/ #2 would be the claim that Trump isn't the most powerful man alive. I've spent more time and words arguing that Trump is beholden to foreign business associates than anyone anywhere—and even I understand that when you control Earth’s most powerful military, it means something.