Well, there’s a summary of the evidence here, from mid-December.
I believe the status is more or less the same, no conclusive evidence the Russian government was behind, certainly nothing that would stand up in court.
Does anyone know if actual evidence one way or the other has surfaced? “Everybody knows” and “a CIA source says so” is not enough.
Oestrogen does not work that way!
How could he have seen this? Did they wake up next to him? If so, it’s not the juice box.
I can’t think of anything biologically hardwired about makeup and dresses either.
Why, do they secretly want to wear makeup and dresses?
Sure. But both can be true here. It’s not like the Russians don’t have a track record to match American imperialism over the years.
It definitely has that “bombing through Nevada / Utah at 2AM” flavor.
Also true, though we should remember that Russia is not really at the same level as the US. Economically and militarlly it’s much weaker.
And again, criticizing Trump for being a “Russian asset” etc. is barking up the wrong tree, and I also see it as counterproductive and an irresponsible way of evading a very real responsibility for losing the election.
I’d rather criticize him for being clueless and incompetent enough to actually be one of Alex Jones’ fanboys.
You mean other than 17 intelligence agencies saying it is true?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/politics/john-brennan-cia-donald-trump-russian-hacking/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-congress-idUSKBN1452E1
Quoting your already named pet journalist. Care to try the New York Times, the Washington Post, or the Guardian?
What is the smoking gun you’re looking for? You’re saying that the dribble of constant leaks of DNC and Clinton data that ultimately derived from the Russian hacking had zero impact on the election? Can you prove that?
And that’s always been true. Yet, they too have a large nuclear arsenal and that matters. The Russians are seeking a great place on the world stage. I know the CIA isn’t entirely trustable, but these things have the ring of truth to it. There is no reason NOT to think that the Russians wouldn’t take an opportunity like this (as we would). This is the nature of intelligence gathering for ages now. We know what the Soviets did and didn’t do during the Cold War, because for a short while the archives there were open. We know what their limitations were, but also their capabilities. I’d suggest that Putin has indeed spent the last decade or so ramping up those capabilities once again.
I just don’t think that our own bad actions means that the Russians don’t engage in bad actions themselves. Both can be true. Neither side has our (or the Russian people’s) interests at heart. I also think that just because the Russians oppose our imperialism doesn’t mean they aren’t imperially minded in their own right. Power, as always is the problem…
Indeed. Putin is a very shady dealer himself. Nothing I have written should be taken as support for him or his policies.
It’s impossible to present the evidence that Russia hacked the DNC
without using words like “possibly,” “appears,” “connects,” and
“indicates.”
Sure, this certainly isn’t as clearcut as when Russia shot down MH-17 over Ukraine. Hacking is necessarily going to be much more difficult to prove.
However, the very most you can come away with, from reading your theintercept.com article, is not that “Russia is innocent” but that “It is more likely than not that Russia is guilty-- but, gee, I’d really like more evidence.” And so would I and everyone else.
Also, the tone is distinctly hysterical, asserting:
What we’re looking at now is the distinct possibility that the United
States will consider military retaliation (digital or otherwise) against
Russia
No, the US is never going to consider non-digital military retaliation against Russia.
If your standard of guilt is “beyond a reasonable doubt” you’re going to be waiting a very long time to make any conclusion about anything relating to espionage.
Can’t we do both? He shows capacious ignorance in his consideration of both Alex Jones and Putin. And, Trump isn’t really an “asset” of Putin’s, so much as a “useful idiot” (to use the Russian term of art).
#“Nature made you a banana but you feel more like a peach? Try the juice box switch.”
If juice boxes can do that, what else are we eating in our lunches?
fruit leather, string cheese, those crackers with the processed cheese and the red plastic smear stick, cup-o-noodles, cheetos, snackables, animal crackers? 
(surprised we haven’t all turned into takana by now…)
Loved watching him get tazed in “Scanner Darkly”.
Are you earnestly accusing me of being a Russian agent? For real?
Talk of McCarthyism and Cold War hysteria - whoever challenges the narrative is a goddam no-good commie, it seems.
Sir, I indeed rescind my charge of you being a Russophilic stooge (however flippant). As soon you showed a hint of being open minded, I knew you could not be working for Russian state organs of propaganda nor a fellow traveller.
Gay frogs. Showtunes. It all makes sense now.
“You sound like you’ve just snorted a mountain of cocaine.”
Side note: Mean Gene for one of the greatest straight men of all time.
I didn’t take it in that spirit. However, I do think that both your criticism and some shady stuff regarding the Russians attempting or actually interfering in our elections can be true. No one is actually looking out for us right now and that’s the problem.
