mice

Still trying to hang on to that fake Russian collusion narrative the media tried to force feed us for over two years, hey?

Not at all?

Why would you think that?

The problem is what Russia DID do and how it is condoned on the right.

1. They hacked into the DNC, beginning just hours after Trump asked them to find the missing emails.
2. They trickled out stolen information they hacked, throughout the fall and up to election day, including,
a. That the DNC was corrupt and was working with Hillary, not giving Bernie the time of day
b. That they gave Hillary the answers to two debate questions before the debate
3. They flooded EVERY major media site with divisive pro-Trump propaganda. 75 million views on facebook alone. Millions upon millions more on other sites
4. They created/promote the Dem/Ukraine conspiracy theory that has been completely debunked yet is still touted by most on the right as fact

There is no question this had an impact on the election. Virtually no one on the right cares. They won't care till it effects them in a negative way. THAT is wrong!

The simple fact that you don't even know what the hell I'm talking about is a great example of just how far we are from where we should be.

You didn't send a link, only an image.

From the name Patrick Lawrence, I've gathered he's with a far right conspiracy news source writing opinion pieces, not news. At this point, this is not real news and this, "story" runs counter to everything we've learned over the last 3yrs.

You could have just typed that headline into the engine and got more than one source, but here you go:
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

I would also ask you to consider spending 6 minutes of your time on very important testimony by Dr. Robert Epstein (who supported and voted for Hillary) on vote manipulation by Facebook and Google. The vote manipulation by the silicone valley elites that he outlines, should be heard by everyone regardless of political affiliations. His wife 'died' this week in a car 'accident'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_hid_csGaE

- Julian Assange has made it clear number of times that he did not receive information from Russia, but from a DNC whistleblower, a Bernie supporter.

- SF Gate (I'd say they're pretty left leaning so you should approve of this source) that Donna Brazile admitted to leaking questions...
https://www.sfgate.com/news/media/Donna-Brazile-Regrets-Sharing-Debate-Questions-795977.php

Interestingly enough, even though Donna Brazile admitted to that herself, Scopes.com still has this listed as False. I'd be to your benefit to understand that even fact checking websites have an agenda.

Donna Brazile and Debbie Schultz should both be in jail but instead, make TV appearances. They should be despised but no one seems to understand that.

Yes, of course Donna B gave Hillary the answers to questions. We know this.

I'm not arguing that the DNC isn't corrupt. It's a mess and I agree it's a mess! This is the greatest silent pin drop on the left there is!

I'm arguing that THIS was not the way to find out about it. Through leaked information planned to disrupt an election. This is not good regardless of party, left or right and all of us should see this.

Julian Assange and wikileaks is considered a political arm of the Russia. It doesn't really matter how he got the information.

"The Nation" The article you sent states: "As part of the editing process, however, we should have made certain that several of the article’s conclusions were presented as possibilities, not as certainties."

"We have also learned since publication, from longtime VIPS member Thomas Drake, that there is a dispute among VIPS members themselves about the July 24 memo."

VIPS, a group made up of retired intelligence agents, did not agree on their findings. The Nation has no further proof than the findings of VIP. It's simply an alternative story, nothing more. It has no more proof than any other story. All intelligence agencies agree that the real culprit was Russia.

Your article is more than two years old. It's time to give it a rest.