"zero evidence" is completely wrong. here's the crowdstrike writeup about the dnc hacks and their reasoning for linking it to russian state hackers: https://ww

"zero evidence" is completely wrong. here's the crowdstrike writeup about the dnc hacks and their reasoning for linking it to russian state hackers: https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/ https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ... there were also, iirc, at least six other private security companies that came to the same conclusion, who weren't hired by the dnc. additionally, every US intelligence agency backed up the claim. again, not a proven statement, but there's a substantial amount of evidence we're aware of. >First, they attempted to claim that emails have been tampered with and then when DKIM signatures proved that hypothesis wrong, they shifted their tactics. do you have a source for the first part? afaik it was just twitter randos floating the idea i'm not a partisan in this fight. i didn't vote, i despised both candidates, but i also think both sides can be a little blind in their eagerness to paint the other as disingenuous. i'm very interested in this subject and it's one i've followed closely, and i'm reasonably sure russian state actors were behind the dnc and podesta hacks, but i also think it's worth keeping an open mind as a general principle and not to be blinded by ideological alliances.