O
OnTheWayOut
We can go with fuji's favorite argument and be just as accurate: There's no PROOF, they only say it "could" have been the Russians. It's right there in your link: "are consistent with the methods and motivations", "could have authorized these activities"Again, here's the joint statement.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07...omeland-security-and-office-director-national
I see that once you buy into the Trump narrative you can dispute everything as part of the 'conspiracy' or 'establishment' or 'MSM. You claimed you did your research and yet all you posted here was an opinion, if you've done your research lets see it.






