The 2016 United States Presidential Election

At this point I believe that McAfee was talking only about the identification of "Guccifer 2.0" as a Russian - and not about the evidence that the Russians actually hacked the DNC. "Guccifer 2.0" released information from the hacks but does not have to be a member of either of the teams that actually extracted the information.
Some more, [url=www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-38610402]The evidence for the latter is rather better. Again, Crowdstrike, the FBI and the CIA all agree on the two groups responsible, identified by their methods.

Things are happening elsewhere, that belong in this topic.Adminnemooseus

from Some evidence for voter fraudCoyote Message 22: RAZD Message 23Coyote Message 24: Except that Trump was not a known quantity by any possible metric, and Hillary was for maintaining the status quo.Hope and change was killed by 6 years of toxic republican obstruction to anything Obama. In the first 2 years we got the ACA passed, then the do nothing GOP stopped government.Now they are the "undo anything Obama" government, and have not done anything to move this country forward (they never will either).EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .Edited by RAZD, : .

From yesterday's Politico: Bernie blames Hillary for allowing Russian interferenceIn a denial striking in its similarity to Trump denials, Bernie Sanders denied Russian assistance in the 2016 Presidential primary:

quote:

---

The Vermont senator was adamant that he did not benefit from Russian bots urging voters to support him. I did not know that Russian bots were promoting my campaign. Russian bots were not promoting my campaign, he said.

---

He also somehow believes it was Clinton's responsibility and within her power to halt Russian interference:

quote:

---

...Sanders and his former campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, presented a series of self-serving statements that were not accurate, and that track with efforts by Trump and his supporters to undermine the credibility of the Mueller probe.

​

The real question to be asked is what was the Clinton campaign [doing about Russian interference]? They had more information about this than we did, Sanders said in the interview with Vermont Public Radio.

---

What we're seeing is human nature in action: "I'm responsible for anything good that happened, and anything bad that happened was somebody else's fault."--Percy

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently redrew the congressional district map. For any who doubt the egregious, overt and blatantly biased nature of Republican gerrymandering and its intention to render as many Democratic votes impotent as possible, here's an example:This is a map of the old district 5: This is a map of the new district 7: Gerrymandering should be illegal because it interferes with the democratic process even more directly than a Russian Facebook bot. Why it's not illegal I don't understand. Both parties seem to accept that the party in power will gerrymander. One thing that's clear: if an election district resembles a drunken effort at drawing a snake or dragon, then it's gerrymandered. Such obvious gerrymandering should be illegal. The only reason gerrymandering has become a topic lately is because the Republicans were the first to widely apply computer technology to the problem of redrawing districts so as to maximize Republican advantage.While gerrymandering isn't illegal, it *can* be challenged. Unfortunately it cannot be challenged because it advantages one political party at the expense of another. There has to be something else at stake, for instance, reducing minority representation.--Percy

Your statement may be premature. The Supreme Court has indicated a willingness to consider partisan gerrymandering, but they have not seen an objective standard for what should an unconstitutional gerrymander. What that seems to mean is that the more conservative folk on the court are going to accept some level of vote stacking.There are a couple of cases on the Supreme Court's docket that will present arguments for an objective standard. Let's see what happens. I have to admit that I am not that hopeful.

The Guccifer 2.0 hacker, who leaked the material stolen from the DNC - has been identified - as a GRU agent. Ars Technica