Since you too were apparently unaware of the singular document upon which your casual recitals of third-hand political punditry are ultimately founded, I suggest reading further than the ammo for nightly newscasts.
And I suggest that your “homework assignments” are stall tactics because you can’t point out anything in that document that supports your claim.
It’s one thing to critique the claims in the intelligence assessment that you linked to. It’s another to say that it all boils down the “RT exists.”
I don’t think anyone can come up with a cockamaime scenario in which RT is being accused of hacking the DNC’s email, or the databases of state election boards. Nobody thinks that Guccifer 2.0 has anything to do with RT. DCleaks.com doesn’t seem to have any relationship to RT as a propaganda outlet.
So you posted a frankly laughable response to the issues raised in this thread and in the document – that the mere existence of RT explains all the accusations of Russian meddling in the election. I know that is your version of Kremlin-sponsored talking points, but they are really, really bad talking points.
State your claim or get off of the garshok.
Either the summary on pages ii and iii are backed up by the document itself or it is not.
If the former, then it contradicts your statement.
If the latter, then why did you waste our time posting it?
I stated my claim and posted the source of said claim. Nothing more to say, really. Once the other posters have read the months-old, much ballyhooed document, and found that “much” of the case indeed rests on the fact that RT exists in time and space, I don’t think we will have anything to argue about.
Apparently you brought nothing to argue with in the first place.
I bet you think Moby Dick was about a whale.
Since I’ve never read the book, if pressed I may guess it was about a whale, but I would not speak with certainty. i think you need help with analogies.
Your lack of curiosity is telling. Much better to allow Rachel Maddow to distill it for you so you don’t get wrong thoughts.
Since he won’t(or can’t) quote from his own source to back up his claim, I’m moving on.
That document is not what everything is based on. It’s really just a summary of what the intel agencies knew in late 2016.
Perhaps this will be more familiar analogy for you…
An actual “coat exists” in Gogol’s Overcoat.
But the document does not rest on the fact that RT exists. It rests on the case that various cyber intrusions occurred, not that there are slanted Russian-operated media outlets.
In other words, to make your claim make any sense, you would have to believe that it is part of RT’s routine operations to hack into email servers and state election board computers. Do you think RT does that?
Much more better for you to just declare victory and go home. You are just wasting your time with this crowd of knuckleheads. [Insert sarcastic smiley here.]
The OP didn’t ask me for cites, but I sense that he wasn’t sold on anything I said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342840-manafort-was-millions-in-debt-to-pro-russia-interests-before-joining
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2017/07/20/nyt-rejects-manaforts-retraction-request-240782
Not necessarily a slam dunk, but it seems out of character from everything we know of Manafort for him to work for free and the NY Times at least seemed to be confident that they were in the legal clear to state that he was in debt to Russia at the time (which makes the idea of working for free even less plausible).
You forgot all their attempts (with many successes) to manipulate the US populace using social media with their web brigades:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/06/troll-armies-social-media-trump-russian
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/the-kremlins-troll-army/375932/
They also hacked the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the material was released against them during congressional election.