>>>re: the hacking issue, there is zero evidence that any outside force tampered with votes. Even the President acknowledged that yesterday. As far as the election goes that's all that matters.
>
>There's plenty of conspiracy theories but AFAIK the only actual test of whether hacking affected the result, was in Wisconsin. If you recall, scientists claimed there was "persuasive evidence" of vote hacking in Wisconsin because HRC received 7% fewer votes on electronic machines compared to paper. This was used to justify a recount. According to election officials, the finding of the recount was:
>
>"There is no evidence that the numbers reported had anything to do with a hack of our technology."
>
>Until and unless some other state does a recount, that's the sum total of actual evidence about hacking. There was no hacking and the credentials of the "scientists" need to be reviewed, because their persuasive evidence is a just another example of what HRC described as appalling behavior that undermines democracy.

In fact, the principal Computer Scientist who was cited in the stories about that made it clear that his work was misrepresented: https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.2q54z6pba

Tamar