>1) The attacks originating from servers owned by Russian companies This doesn't even hint that there might be Russian involvement. It's utterly irrelevant. An

>1) The attacks originating from servers owned by Russian companies This doesn't even hint that there might be Russian involvement. It's utterly irrelevant. Anyone doing something like this will most likely be hosting either in Russia or the Netherlands. >2) Pseudo-admission/gloating by low-level officials Low-level officials probably aren't in positions to confirm intelligence operations such as these, and even if they were, such behaviour would hardly be unexpected from an entirely unrelated party. >3) Wikileaks and Assange's increasingly close relationship with Russia Would you like to back that up somehow? Not all of us share your security clearance so we can't read the emails between Assange and Putin. >4) The behavior of the Trump campaign, taking an exceptionally pro-Russian tack. Indeed, the only change they demanded be made to the Republican platform was to take out some anti-Russian commitments. The pro-Russian tack only stands out if you ignore the rest of their politics... In which case literally anything would stand out, no? >True, this is all circumstantial This is all bullshit. There exists significantly better technical evidence of Russian involvement available to the public.