[mellow-lake-day]

How are you going to convict Russian intelligence officers? You think Russia will hand them over?

Again the hard evidence that you are dying to see is classified and would reveal American hacking capabilities. If Putin is not willing to send over his officers who did that hacking, then why should the US government give up the evidence for nothing in return?

Revealing how America identified the Russian hackers would be extremely valuable for Putin and his KGB/GRU operatives. They can use this information to better their hacking operations in the future.

[rendall]

> Again the hard evidence that you are dying to see is classified and would reveal American hacking capabilities. <

Then we are back to exactly what I said at the start: they remain allegations only. Nothing has been proven, as you said. One either believes anonymous sources within the CIA and the people who believe them, or one wants evidence for such an extraordinary claim.

Remember: it's not just about Russians, but the original allegation was that the Trump campaign was involved. That has been very quietly walked back.

The DNC was definitely hacked and the content of the emails were embarrassing to powerful people, but whenever the content of the emails are discussed, people start shouting about Russians and Trump's love of Putin. This is very convenient to these same powerful people

The email exposure could have been a revelatory renaissance for the DNC, a real moment of self-aware house-cleaning. I was really hoping they would slim down and become a truly effective opposition party. Instead, it's Russians.

Given the lack of evidence and the unprecedented political climate, particularly the distraction from the emails themselves, I would like more evidence than "Trust the DNC and the CIA and the NSA when we say: Trump colluded with Russians to get elected!"

Do new Presidents have a meeting with Head Spook who says "Support our illegal, unethical mass surveillance program or we'll make everyone think you like to get peed on"?

Every single American should demand that evidence even if they despise Trump. The same destabilizing allegation can be made against anyone without that requirement for evidence irrespective of political persuasion. I would be this oppositional on behalf of Clinton, Biden, Obama, anyone. You should too.

[mellow-lake-day]

>Remember: it's not just about Russians, but the original allegation was that the Trump campaign was involved. That has been very quietly walked back.

Well considering that Trump's attorney general William Barr shut down the investigation and is reversing Mueller's charges that is not surprising. So not only was there never a full investigation done but the mediocre investigation we had is being undone. We will never know the truth of Trump's and Putin's secret relationship until a proper investigation is done. Including Trump's finances.

https://www.justsecurity.org/69266/barr-is-dismantling-charg...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/08/mich...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/30/us/politics/trump-russia-...

No one walked back on anything. It was simply not investigated since Republicans (especially people like Mitch McConnell) are putting party over country and not holding the president accountable.

DNC has many problems including mediocre security and treating candidates differently and picking favorites but that is not the topic of the discussion.

>Every single American should demand that evidence even if they despise Trump.

The problem with your entire premise of demanding evidence is that it's a red herring. This is not about producing evidence because any evidence produced you can label as fake or made up or false flag. Once evidence is provided the goal post is moved to evidence being made up or not credible. There is absolutely no benefit in the US government revealing evidence except for making Putin's team of hackers smarter. The people who believed that Russia did it --- will continue to believe it and that people who didn't --- well they will find new excuses for themselves.

[rendall]

>> any evidence produced you can label as fake or made up or false flag... Once evidence is provided the goal post is moved to evidence being made up or not credible. <<

There was no goal-post moving here, and accusing others of bad faith is against the guidelines. Accusing me of bad faith here is unfair and inaccurate. I ask for evidence that matches the magnitude of the assertion and that has never changed. Evidence I would accept is falsifiable: the forensic footprints of the malware, or equivalent

Can I see the evidence myself and evaluate it on its own terms? The answer, after 4 years, is a hard no. Lots of articles; lots of partisans saying it's true; lots of people such as yourself who are convinced, accusing others of moving goalposts; but nothing tangible

My original assertion is that this all remains an allegation. In response, you and the other user posted lots of links to people affirming that they know it to be true.

Your original assertion was that it has been proven and to claim otherwise is "disinformation", but so far, and bear with me please: so far, you have people telling you that it's true. Only. And that's okay! It doesn't mean they are lying or misinformed. They could be telling us the truth. At the end of the day, if you trust those people not to be lying or misinformed, then it's good enough

I would hope that you see here that principled people can disagree, even if you find all the affidavits for it compelling and convincing.

>> No one walked back on anything. It was simply not investigated since Republicans (especially people like Mitch McConnell) are putting party over country and not holding the president accountable. <<

It could be that they are cynical, perhaps a bit evil, and know in their hearts the President is working against the interests of the country, but just gain too much personal benefit from looking too closely. Or, and stay with me here, perhaps at least some of them truly and reasonably believe that the evidence is not strong enough

I'm most likely done with this thread, but I do appreciate your contribution. If you would like to have the last word, know that I will read it and consider carefully what you have to say. I would love one link to the evidence you personally found most compelling. I will open-mindedly look at it

[mellow-lake-day]

>perhaps at least some of them truly and reasonably believe that the evidence is not strong enough

Again this is why we need a thorough investigation into the matter. So far there has not been one. You of all people need to be demanding this since you want to get to the bottom of this and see the evidence.

Furthermore senate republicans have walked of committee hearings, they refuse to call witnesses, and they refuse to listen to witnesses. This shows you that they don't care about the evidence. And that answers your last question.

[mellow-lake-day]

Speaking of Russian hackers, here is some more reading material on the subject matter in case you are interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24828731

[rendall]

Here's an example of what I would like: https://netzpolitik.org/2015/digital-attack-on-german-parlia...

It is a straight-forward report on what the malware found on the German parliament's computers. The researcher is clear about what is known for certain and what is speculation.

No editorializing, no committees, no VIPs testifying before Congress, no confusing arrays of links to other links to other links ending up at broken links.

Does such a thing exist regarding the DNC hack? If you cannot find it (as I cannot, after 4 years), consider that it does not exist. And if it does not exist, why not?