You seem to be mostly pointing to NSA as the only possible source of confirmation of Russian efforts to interfere with the election in 2016. If the NSA has followed their charter  (they're not supposed to conduct domestic surveillance, unless it is necessary for their counterintel and protection of communications and information systems (cyber) missions), then any information they would have would likely be incomplete, wouldn't you agree?

ODNI seems to be the entity behind the assertion that they have "high confidence" in concluding the Russians actively sought to interfere with the election. Likely they have intel beyond what the NSA (which hoovers up a lot of raw stuff but mostly focuses on sigintel) which may well be the most conclusive/persuasive.

If you want to hang your skepticism on Binney's op ed, I would first ask Binney why he seems to focus exclusively on the NSA, but doesn't consider other members of the DNI and what they may have found. 

The Centre for Research on Globalization (cited by lowphreak) is a very poor source for anything that rational people might consider factual.

Your timing is impeccable.  I do agree with your assessment of Trump farther below.  I knew he was no choir boy.  I knew he was involved with the Mafia, but how do you not use massive amounts of concrete and not get involved with Mafia ?  That did not deter me in making my choice out of the binary one offered.   I do know the worlds of construction and the Mafia, independently for different reasons.  I was at one time a Teamster during the era of the Danny Green bombings here in Cleveland.  I will admit that I actually have some respect for the Mafia, based upon what I know.  

I do know that Trump can direct the FBI to investigate anything he wants and am puzzled as to why he hasn't yet, given all that there is.  But we have just installed a new director, whom I know very little about.  So I have to wait and see on that before I conclude that Trump would hang himself if he directed more far reaching investigations.  That and I am convinced that the FBI has been at the very least politicized and no longer capable of conducting impartial investigations of political figures.

Thanks for your input and now back to Russia, Russia, Russia, already in progress ...

So the NSA and the Mainstream Media (MSM) are running a propaganda campaign. Against Trump. Because they don't want him to be president. Oh wait he already is.

...

"There were only 4 out of 17 agencies that reluctantly agreed with what is actually a NSA leak, and that based on "best conclusions", not verifiable evidence, and after a charade was presented that ALL agencies agreed, ("widespread consensus") when they actually did not. "

Do you have a link or links to back the claims you make here?

Surely!

 

Surely Fox news had their facts straight and verified the existence of a plan. It was pretty well established by this point that Trump had a knack for stretching the truth, so it would have been prudent to verify before putting your journalistic integrity on the line...

And they had 8 years to work out a solution already but the dog ate their homework, I guess.

The president-elect insisted that his plan for replacing the Affordable Healthcare Act is all but finished, and added that care would have “lower numbers, much lower deductibles.” He went as far to say that he’s ready to reveal it alongside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“It’s very much formulated down to the final strokes. We haven’t put it in quite yet, but we’re going to be doing it soon,” Trump said during the interview with the paper.

He added that he’s still waiting for Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., to be confirmed as his secretary for health and human services. A hearing for his confirmation has yet to be scheduled.

...

Trump insists that the new law will be better despite worries from Congress and the possibility of putting 20 million Americans at risk of losing their health coverage.

“We’re going to have insurance for everybody. There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.”

I'll give a couple of examples of former intel people that probably know a helluva lot more about this than anyone on RP forums. I say this as a former U.S. Army Intel Analyst myself, which I left in 1981. (BTW, spare me the mindless "thank you for your service" jingoism. It doesn't mean a thing in this day of American rogue state antics and war crimes that the people regurgitating such faux-patriotism have ignored.)

You want to "support our troops"? Number One: get them to hell out of the Middle East conflicts. 16 years is quite enough. Next, rehire the 50,000 personnel that the VA is short on, and fund it properly — take it out of the Pentagon budget, and stop giving money to Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, and KBR, et al. Only then will those slogans mean a goddamned thing.

First, I'd like to agree with what Craig Murray the former Brit intel officer and ambassador said,

"I do not support Donald Trump. I do support truth. There is much about Trump that I dislike intensely. Neither do I support the neo-liberal political establishment in the USA. The latter’s control of the mainstream media, and cunning manipulation of identity politics, seeks to portray the neo-liberal establishment as the heroes of decent values against Trump. Sadly, the idea that the neo-liberal establishment embodies decent values is completely untrue."

...that that is also my position. Trump is a disgusting embarrassment to the U.S. and IMO is only in this for his and his family's enrichment and aggrandizement. He's a huckster from NY that has been in bed with the Mafia for decades, and has a long record of ne'er do well there (which itself begs the question of why didn't the MSM 'swiftboat' him on that during the campaign?). The Clintons and establishment Democrats are no better, both are corrupt to the core. BOTH parties are merely two sides of the same oligarchy, and this whole kerfluffle is but an internecine fight between them for ultimate control of the direction of U.S. hegemony.

The intel agencies have not publicly shared any credible and verifiable evidence one way or the other about Russian hacking of the Democratic email. That is a fact.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/07/russiagate-stink-without-secret.html

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/11/us-insiders-not-russia-leaked-clinton-emails.html

There are appropriate links in both of those articles. However, many are unaware that Trump as President has the power to order any information declassified, and to share it with whoever he wants. So Trump can order the declassification of all information which the NSA has on the Democratic party (DNC and Podesta) emails. The man who created the NSA’s global electronic data-gathering system, William Binney, told Washington’s Blog that if the DNC and Podesta were hacked, the NSA would already have the data in their files proving who did it.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/tell-russia-hacked-election.html

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/creator-nsas-global-surveillance-system-calls-b-s-russian-hacking-report.html

Therefore, if Trump is innocent on this issue, his best chance at avoiding impeachment is order the NSA to declassify its data on the “hacking” of the DNC’s servers and Podesta emails. His enemies would be much better off pursuing the Qatar issue as I mentioned a couple of pages ago, as I certainly would if I were in a position to make it front and center.

What's upsetting is that otherwise sensible people are buying this whole MSM propaganda campaign - without any critical thinking or due investigation - while nearly ignoring other more important problems facing the country.

Anything objective sticks to the facts, but anything subjective has feelings. Objective and subjective are opposites. 

So it's how we feel about a law that makes it legitimate or illegitimate ?

We just went through 8 years of your definition ...

And they had 8 years to work out a solution already but the dog ate their homework, I guess.

I can't predict what this administration will or won't do.  Who knew we would ever have such an incompetent asshat as our president?  I'm done telling myself that things will never happen based on logical rational.  These people in power and their supporters are neither logical or reasonable. This entire administration is based on hate and only looking out for #1.  Anyone or anything remotely socially beneficial is seen as some sort of enemy.  It's crazy but true.

And they had 8 years to work out a solution already but the dog ate their homework, I guess.

2 years?    Then what happens? Repeal and replace would mean 2 years.  That's reasonable and humane.  Repeal alone is indefinite.

Clean repeal as the Bill is written keeps the ACA in place for two years after passage allowing for a solution to be worked out.  It does not end the ACA abruptly.

You lost all your credibility many posts ago but certainly cemented it with the most recent few. No proof that Russia hacked DNC? What branch of government intelligence are/were you employed by that led you to this alternate conclusion?
 
I actually somewhat admired your loyalty up until the point that it crossed over to blind loyalty. As I said before, it's very tough defending the indefensible but you give it a game try.
 
Just wondering where you stand on O.J... guilty or innocent?
9/11... a government plot?
 
The inmates are running the asylum there is no denying it. All of us should be worried. 
 
On a separate note I can't stop laughing when Trump continues to point the finger at the Obama administration for what he feels were their transgressions. The bottom line is that he is in charge and he needs to take the heat for things going south during his administration instead of trying to blame others. Heck why stop at Obama? Let's just list all the shortcomings of the administrations of the last 5 or 6 presidents. Where will that get us? I'm willing to bet that Trump has never heard of Truman's famous line "The buck stops here". 
 
Trump's likely response would be: Who's Truman?

What is clean repeal?  Do you mean that like most republicans repeal the ACA without replacement?  Why would anyone consider that a good idea?  Is your healthcare important to you?

"Legitimate" - according to the law - is not objective.  If it were, we wouldn't need lawyers, juries, etc. to interpret the law. It is *very* subjective.

they are not going to do that.  they will just keep it in limbo, making it impossible for ACA to work as planned, and hoping to leave the blame with the democrats.