[Alberta's Child]

I took a quick scan through that report, and I couldn't find anything that I would consider "hacking" by any measure. The fact that they spend so much time detailing Russia's propaganda efforts on Russian television is very telling. How does that qualify as interference in the U.S. election? LOL.

[uncommonsense]

"I took a quick scan through that report, and I couldn't find anything that I would consider "hacking" by any measure. The fact that they spend so much time detailing Russia's propaganda efforts on Russian television is very telling. How does that qualify as interference in the U.S. election? LOL."

Same here. 25 pages - 1/3 blank, most make as much sense as "blah, blah, blah" (and I spent many years in high level InfoTech consulting - so I know blah, blah when I read it!).

"This page intentionally left blank."

2 paragraphs that epitomize their "evidence" on Pg 1

"In trying to influence the US election, we assess the Kremlin sought to advance its longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, the promotion of which Putin and other senior Russian leaders view as a threat to Russia and Putin’s regime.

Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him. "

What a bunch of horse hooey! Bloggers playing National Security Analysts on paper. I cannot WAIT for this merry band of sycophantic statist losers to ride off back to their basements!