OBAMA VOTER ANN ALTHOUSE NOT IMPRESSED WITH JIFFY-POP CIA REPORT ON RUSSIAN HACKING AND THE ELECTION:

How does that evidence support the finding that the Russians were trying to help Trump and hurt Hillary — as opposed to just hacking into everything they could? Are senior Obama administration officials reliable in making that leap or is this political junk?

There’s also the evidence that “it was largely documents from Democratic Party systems that were leaked to the public” (through Wikileaks). You have to interpret that evidence. Republicans say “their networks were not compromised, asserting that only the accounts of individual Republicans were attacked.” The NYT cites a “senior government official” corroborating that position.

The NYT also raises the theory that the Russians — like most people — assumed Hillary was going to win, and they weren’t trying to defeat her, but undercut her presidency. In this theory, they weren’t so concerned with hurting Trump because they didn’t think he’d win.

I’m reading these new conclusions as political junk.

Yep. But, you know, the past several decades haven’t been good ones for the “intelligence community.”

UPDATE: From the comments at Althouse: “During the 2012 campaign the left and media roundly mocked Romney for saying that Russia was our number one geopolitical foe. Now that they’ve lost this election, they’re suddenly finding Ivan behind every bush, tree and rock. Sad!”

Plus: “I can’t believe all these people who love Obama so much are falling for this! Surely Obama would not have let this happen!!!”‘

And: “Are our intelligence agencies so weak they can’t pick up on Russia interfering with our elections and then stop it? I’m impressed that the ‘deep dive’ ordered yesterday is already completed. Sounds legit.”