Where is the server?:

Donald Trump layed down the gauntlet today, asking, "Where is the server?"

He is referring to the fact that the only 'evidence' Russia actually hacked the DNC server and then leaked the information to wikileaks is a report by the private company Crowdstrike that says they found some malware in the server typically utilized by Russia to hack with.  The problems with this are manifold.  First off, we are just taking Crowdstrike's word on this 'finding,' because no one else, including any law enforcement agency, has ever actually double checked Crowdstrike to see if what they're saying is actually true.

Secondly, anyone can use malware, the malware that is supposedly a 'signature' of Russian hacking was already distributed to the whole world and anyone who just thought it was good software or wanted to frame Russia as having done the hacking could have relied on said malware while not actually being Russia.

Third, Crowdstrike is a heavily democrat biased, pro-Hillary company so anything they say about the election is suspect.

Fourth, the fact that the FBI nor any other intelligence agency has even bothered to double check this finding is so fishy that it's as if they know it's fraudulent and don't want to expose the secret by actually checking it.  There's no other conceivable reason why we would be so blase about what is, supposedly, an 'act of war' and a 'threat to our democracy.'

Fifth, it could easily have been Russian individuals using this malware due to their own pro-Trump feelings having nothing to do with the Russian state.  It's not like these hacks were rocket science, the DNC and Podesta's emails had zero serious protection in place, it was like taking candy from a baby.  Anyone could have done it.

Sixth, Julian Assange, who has never been caught in a single lie concerning wikileaks, says the wikileaks information he got was not from Russia.

Seventh, the same American intelligence agencies, who lied about infinite other things, like Hillary was innocent of all charges, the WMD in Iraq, the Steele dossier which was actually a paid for hoax by the Hillary campaign, the leaks, unmaskings, unlawful surveillances, the Comey memoes and lies under oath to Congress, etc, etc, cannot be taken seriously about this or any other issue on Earth.  Putin is a far more credible actor than the CIA, FBI, etc, etc.

Eighth, Seth Rich, a pro-Bernie Sanders campaigner and worker at the DNC, was in a position where he could have leaked all the information wikileaks released.  He ended up mysteriously murdered a few days or weeks after the wikileaks information went public, without anything being taken from him.  So we are to believe that he just happened to be gunned down for no reason, with no one ever being able to discover or arrest the killers.  This stinks to high heaven.

Ninth, even supposing Russia hacked the DNC server and Podesta's emails and then gave the information to wikileaks, democracy thrives under transparency and withers under censorship and thought control.  We should be thanking Putin for making our democracy more robust by giving everyone the information they needed to make an informed decision about who the next leader of our country should be.  Since no one is saying there's anything false that was leaked from these sources, Putin in this case was just a very successful investigative journalist.  He should be awarded a pulitzer prize for exposing the truth, just like everyone fetes the leakers of embarrassing secrets in the past -- Deepthroat, the Pentagon Papers, etc, etc.  Why is it that this time when the truth is revealed to the public, and only this time, that somehow it's wrong and needs to be condemned?

Doesn't everyone want to know the truth?  So what harm, exactly, was done, by voters knowing the truth before they entered the voting booth?

This Russia hacked the elections shit has been going on for two years and it all boils down to this ludicrous, flimsy, meaningless trifle of an argument, that Crowdstrike's random analysis is the definitive word of God on exactly everything that happened and that it's unfair that only Hillary's dirty secrets were exposed to the public and when things are unfair that's sad and someone should be made to pay.

Donald Trump said, nope, I'm not going along with this ridiculous farce.  I'm throwing it all back in your faces by asking the simple question -- 'why hasn't any objective, neutral, third party ever investigated this supposedly hacked server and gotten to the truth of the matter?  Why are we just taking random people's words for matters of crucial import?  Would any courtroom condemn anyone on hearsay evidence and zero forensic proof of any kind?  And yet we're supposed to go to war with Russia on nothing but the word of Crowdstrike's IT guys?'

The two greatest nuclear powers on Earth should annihilate each other because Crowdstrike says Russia used an unfair tactic that disadvantaged Hillary in the election and by gum it was her turn waagh waaaagh waaaagh.

Trump should have just said, "WOMP WOMP" and rolled his eyes over this endless Russian hackers bullshit.  He was kind enough to ask 'Where is the server?' instead.  So the ball is in your court, now, FBI and democrats in general.  Where is the server?  Where is the forensic evidence?  Where is the proof of your claims about anything at all?  We have never been shown a single iota of proof about anything.  You've lied about everything else under the sun, including even that Trump overfed a bunch of Japanese fish when there was video evidence showing he had not, so why the hell should we trust you on this?

If the president of the United States has never been given a shred of evidence supporting the Russian hackers lie, then that means there is no secret, confidential information that the government has proving Russia did the hacking, that we peasants just aren't allowed to see.  The President hasn't seen anything either.  So there just isn't any proof.  Or, even more absurdly, the President hasn't been 'cleared' to see the proof yet because he isn't high ranking enough in the government to have the right to see what the FBI has seen.  Which means they're just openly declaring a coup against our elected government and declaring themselves to be the true sovereigns of the country.  It's one or the other.  Either there's no evidence or the FBI is a den of treason whose denizens should be lined up against a wall and shot en masse.

Which is it, FBI?  You tell me.