>ODNI releases evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and Podesta >pol decries evidence as shoddy, and mostly inference-based >literally believes that HRC was to blame for Benghazi, based on shoddy, inference-based evidence
Most of you tards don't understand the first thing about computer networking and hacking, so you put your faith supposed authorities to explain why people are stupid for trusting the CIA (who is an authority)
Tl;dr 1. pol likes inference-based evidence when it supports their beliefs, and doesn't when it does not.
2. pol makes appeal to authorities to demonstrate why liberals are dumb for appealing to authorities.
The amount of inconsistency on this board really is sickening.
You know you didn't actually post any evidence to support your own claims to the contrary
Jaxon Richardson
It's another empty statement without proofs.
The real russian hack it's making the intelligence agencies look incompetent.
Jacob Cruz
Fuck off CIAshill.
Chase Perez
It's in the spirit of things. Plus, I don't buy that nominalist verificationism anyway.
Leo Lopez
a priori argument =/= empty statement. To hell with your meataxe verificationism
Josiah Watson
Didn't they tossed out 35 "russian spies".
Couldn't get a confession out of any of them?
Dominic Roberts
I've got an open mind. Convince me the Russians did it by posting proof other than "Intelligence agencies did it," and we are gold, sonny-boy.
John Taylor
Down at the very bottom in small writing it says "This annex was originally published on 11 December 2012 by the Open Source Center, now the Open Source Enterprise."
On page 6, doesn't that mean RT influenced the election for Obama? Does this also mean the CIA report is imposing the deta from 2012 on the Trump election? That is... bad data.
inb4 Right after Russian Reset, inb4 Right After Obama caught on open mic telling Russian shill "This is my last election, i'll have more flexibility soon".
COMMIE Shill BTFO
Nicholas Perez
I don't give a shit who did the hacks. What the hacks revealed is what the issue is.
