The “My derision exempts me from making an cogent argument” method seemed to work fine for Trump.

I didn’t have to do anything to discredit you or your post. Your ridiculous, tinfoil hat conspiracy theories did that all by themselves.

“Hillary Clinton is an incompetent, day drinking, racist seeking to manipulate the voters by having a a “private” belief system that is different from her “public” belief system.”

Do you not believe in evolution? Because that’s still just a theory. Relativity? Climate change? There’s nothing to PROVE those things - you accept them based on a preponderance of data that other people have spent their careers researching. I mean, you haven’t gathered your own data on evolution, right? You trust the…

Congress sat on the “jury” and all the intelligence agencies (“prosecuting attorney”) made their case, with all the facts. And despite more than half the “jury” being sympathetic to the defendant, they agree he’s guilty.

No, it’s not. It’s applying the facts you know to the situation and making the best determination.

In lieu of hard evidence (which you will never see baring some declassification years from now), how might one think critically about the issue? Oh... I don’t know... maybe by listening to people who have actually seen all the classified information? Even to people like Graham and McCain with a built-in reason NOT to…

There is a classified version of this report with much, much more to it - including specific names of Russian higher-ups involved. Congress has seen it and it’s the reason Republicans like Graham and McCain are strongly coming out against Russia.

They’re busy trying to convince people on Twitter than Mexico is still paying for the wall.

Congress has seen the classified info which is much more complete that what you read. And after reading that, REPUBLICANS like Grahan and McCain (among others) - guys who know everything the intelligence communities know - say Russia did it.

But there you go. You just admitted it. Wikileaks was weaponized by both Assange and Russia to help defeat someone they didn’t like. That use of Wikileaks destroys any higher “transparency” they claim.