This is what I've believed too for a while. It's clear that there were efforts prior to this to promote Trump, with Rykov and Project Lakhta both active throughout 2015.
It's hard to know if Rykov and the people bankrolling him and Project Lakhta were true believers, or if they just thought they were creating general disruption, but I still tend to agree that there wasn't a general consensus of viability until early 2016.
Note also that Maria Butina made statements about Trump in 2015. Again, we don't know if it was primarily disruptive. I always believed Butina's operation had everything to do with NRA and Congress, and little to do with Trump, except when convenient because of her placement.
We also have the Agalarovs working Trump since early 2013 (well before Miss Universe). We have Alferova saying in early 2014 that he'd make a great President.
The point of all of this is that it's important to differentiate between significant Russian interest in Trump and serious interest in him as a viable candidate.

All the hacking efforts occurred after late winter, early spring 2016.
I'd actually divide Russian interest into three distinct periods:
1980s through 2012 - casual interest in random loudmouth rich American
2013-2015 - accelerated interest in manipulating his presidential run for general chaos
2016 onward - realization that they could install him.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas A. Fine 🇺🇸

Thomas A. Fine 🇺🇸 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @thomasafine

26 Jan
OK I'm all for going in to a brawl with McConnell over the filibuster, but if we don't have even 50 votes for it (Dems Sinema, Manchin oppose removing it), there's no reason to fight this battle at all correct?
Although I have to say, if Schumer was gonna agree to keep filibuster in place in any case, in exchange for some other concession from McConnell, didn't Manchin and Sinema just ruin Schumer's negotiating leverage?
If I'm getting this wrong, please explain.
Read 7 tweets
9 Jan
Who remembers "Stand back and stand by" back in September? Probably most of us, and it has come up a few times in recent discussions.

But I'm curious if there's not a deeper more literal connection: is there a time where he told his supporters to no longer stand by?
So I note that in his January 6th speech there were several uses of the world "stand" that could be construed as signals, directly updating his previous "stand by" order.
This implied threat has gotten a lot of attention for the treat: " And Mike Pence, I hope you're going to STAND UP for the good of our Constitution and for the good of our country."
Read 8 tweets
8 Jan
Correct me if I'm wrong. If Congress tries it's one 25th amendment maneuver separate from the executive branch, as the amendment allows, they'd have to pass a law, which would have to go before the President, be vetoed, then pass both houses again by 2/3rd majority.

Yes?
And then, having changed the law, would need to follow the process they just legislated.

That all seems more implausible than impeachment.
Also it'd be nice if they wrote a law that wasn't full of holes for exploitation and abuse by future corrupt members of Congress.

Just impeach.
Read 4 tweets
8 Jan
People keep asking what the plan was if there was a plan.

This is just a guess... but I think they planned on taking all of Congress hostage, and create a pretext for Trump to declare martial law.

That was a legitimately feasible path to successful coup.
And they missed it by mere minutes.
Trump's emergency powers are mind-bogglingly broad. He could have shut everything down indefinitely.
Read 5 tweets
8 Jan
Imagine if this was a Muslim protest that turned into a riot, which masked a highly organized and well-prepared group of terrorists who successfully infiltrated the Capital building with intent to take hostages, while insiders hindered police and national guard deployment.
All you have to do in the previous tweet is change "Muslim" to "Trumpist" and this is exactly what actually happened.

Where is the outrage?
This is in many ways worse than 9/11. Far less dead people and in some ways less dramatic. But 9/11 never put our actual functioning government in danger.

And this being done by domestic terrorists ought to be more scary, not less, than
Read 9 tweets
7 Jan
Let's collect all the evidence that this was a planned and coordinated attack into one place, ok?

For starters, printed shirts with a date don't just grow out of the ground. Image
People acting in a prepared fashion, working together as a team.
D.C. wasn't the only location of an attack on a capital building, at around the same time.

thedailybeast.com/local-maga-mob…
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!