The CIA has the evidence but does not want to share with the public. There is a renegade CIA group that works to protect 45? the FBI is willing to follow the evidence they have but the CIA is not sharing or helping.

I may have misunderstood but that's my impression.

1) Patience.

2) Watergate took two years to unfold, and this is bigger.

3) There are jurisdictional rules that hamper some parts of investigations. There are ways to overcome such barriers but they take an extra step.

4) The FBI is naturally cautious, especially with explosive high level malfeasance. Comey's October letter about emails is "the exception that proves the rule".

5) The Intelligence Community is even more cautious.

6) The renegade group is in the FBI. The New York office has agents who regularly leak to Giulliani.

7) Patience. It's coming out. The coverup will fail. Drip, drip, drip.

operating in the US and the investigation of Trump's Russian ties, because they probably overlap.

"The voter rolls are said to fit into this because of "microtargeting". Using email, Facebook and Twitter, political advertising can be tailored very precisely: individual messaging for individual voters."

Republicans care more about power than American values.

... there's more than one way to hack the election !!

In order to hack an election legally, you simply hack the voters, not the votes.

Cross-reference Voter rolls with Facebook profiles; Determine the target's psychology from analyzing their "likes"; select the approppriate message for their psychology. Put the messsge where the target is most likely to see it. Presto, a vote.

It's not 100% foolproof, but statistically sufficient. And unlike hacking the votes themselves, it's a legal technique, once you have the voter rolls.

That is a conclusion being jumped to.

Profiles in Cambridge Analytics are drawn from social media quizzes and history.

In the same way that data mining can precisely micro-target communities for gerrymandering.

Profiles that are data-mined aren't as useful if you don't know how the target may be thinking of voting. that's where the voter rolls come in - it allows much more selective targeting.

One would scarcely expect CA to acknowledge something like that. We do know they were involved in the US election, though.

And I see no evidence presented to prove that Russia hacking into voter registrations was actually used in any targeted fashion.

The question I have after reading this is:

Is there proof that Russians collaborated with Cambridge Analytics?

Cambridge Analytics didn't need to hack into voter roles.


It is, so far, all allegation - and not just the parts concerning Donald Trump and his people.
For instance, the US intelligence agencies said last October that the voter rolls had been "scanned and probed" from a server in Russia.

... changing of the totals.

ANY interference, direct or indirect, by an outside actor for the sake of changing votes (via whatever means) is actionable enough.

Another reason why citizen united is horrible because it allows for such ...

I don't want to get bogged down in semantics

Campaign activity conducted by foreign governments is generally frowned on by polite society.

And it's fundamentally dishonest to say that links to what Cambridge Analytics does.

Data mining is being used. Apparently Clinton's campaign went with old fashioned tv advertising which is very expensive and inaccurate.

Democrats need to understand data mining and start using it.

If two jigsaw pieces fit together perfectly, it's not dishonest to speculate that they belong together.

Nothing has been investigated in public yet. I'm free to speculate all I want, sorry.

Russian money, Russian geopolitical interests, Russian hackers, Cambridge Analytica, and the Trump campaign are all in this toxic stew together.

I very firmly believe that this will be proven out in time.

I will say it one more time: Cambridge Analytics doesn't need Russian help with data mining.

Democrats wouldn't need outside help if they finally decide to enter the 21st century and use data/mining and social media for micro-targeting.

Maybe some actual evidence will present itself that Russian hacking into voter registration files in a few states was used.

Evidence will emerge one way or the other.

I'm curious what's behind your vehemence on this question?

... something amiss is not "jamming" anything together.

There's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAy more than enough circumstantial evidence here to conduct an intense investigation and to even speculate that the minipootin team cheated to win.

This isn't hard

... talking to gumpers on this.

Look, no...

NO

The US voting system is NOT as secure as it should be for free and fair elections, not at all... there are a multitude of ways to interfere with US elections and it looks like the KGOP wants to keep it that way.