As with everything that comes from your candidate and the rest of his supporters, your argument is inane.

The truth is, I don't care if it was the Russians or not. Your candidate is grossly unqualified and he's going to run the country into the ground. And when he does I'm going to remind people like you that you're absolute oxygen thieves who long ago parted ways with logic and reality.

What I'm aware of and you apparently aren't is that outlandish claims require extraordinary evidence. Your claim is that the FBI and the CIA have independently reached the same erroneous conclusion. The claim I think is probably correct is that a nation whose dictator has a grudge against Clinton and excels at manipulating the perceptions of the intellectually malleable took steps to influence the outcome of an election such that it favored him. Your claim is more outlandish than the one I think is probably correct. More importantly, your opinion doesn't count. If you want to be treated like a decent human being whose opinion matters then start acting like one.

For anyone reading this who hasn't parted ways with logic and reason: What's public is insufficient to say beyond a shadow of a doubt that Putin is behind the hacks. We likely won't see the hard evidence made public for years, depending on what assets of ours lead to the conclusion that we're getting.

What we do know is that the threat agents whose MO the DNC hack matches have been suspected of Russian government ties for some time. Those suspicions are worth validating and should certainly be scrutinized, but it's not like the responsible party has a time machine.

So if it's not Putin/Russia, here's what had to happen: Someone mimicked the attack pattern associated with a group believed to have Russian ties, who wanted Trump to win / Clinton to lose, and did so well enough that they fooled the FBI and the CIA. Sure you could connect those dots, but you'd need a mobius strip.