.....
Let me.cite a bit for the sake of ease:
December 2016 CIA report....
Problem is, you are not citing anything but the content of an alleged report. You are not citing the report. I'm not even sure it matters if you were.
Everyone's aware that the Demos have obsessively harped on the "Russian angle."
Everyone will agree that the Wikileaks releases, showing the true nature of Hillary and her criminal associates, influenced the election.
But nobody has to agree that the material was given to Wikileaks by the Russians. There does not seem to be evidence for that. You seem to think "someone said it says so in a CIA report" is evidence. It isn't.
I personally find Julian Assauge's story about where the material came from more believable.
Dude, wake the fuck up, man.
I cited Wikipedia, that was clearly stated.
And man, this shit isn't alleged, this is an intelligence report produced by your country. You can not accept the shit, but that does not make it go away. You are free to take the word of an enemy of the state over all intelligence agencies in your country, it speaks to your intellectual stubbornness. I'm not making this shit up. These are the unfortunate facts, I don't want to deal with this shit as much as you.
Remove your fingers from your ears, Spendulus.
Is the entire Intelligence community Democratic?/