So, the Electoral College won't have those answers, either, when it is to act next week.  Heck, the House won't even have those answers when it is to act in the first week of January.

Newsweek's excellent Kurt Eichenwald just tweeted that the delay is due to the lout's camp finding out that Newsweek is out tomorrow with a report on an investigation into the lout's businesses. . . .

And remember this:  

It isn't just about what the large orange lout owns.  

It's also about what the large orange lout owes.

Stooge? So, you are telling me that Tillerson knowingly and willingly negotiated with Russia to the detriment of Exxon ? That he did Putins bidding?
What planet are you from?
I would say Tillerson cleaned Putins clock, that company has been an impressive success. They have more offices, in more countries, and more employees than the State Department.
And , I dare say, he will not keep classified e mails on a private server.

The U.S. Energy Department said on Tuesday it will not comply with a request from President-elect Donald Trump's Energy Department transition team for the names of people who have worked on climate change and the professional society memberships of lab workers.

The colloquialism is "over the top," idiot Duffy.

from nytimes.com:
Some of the rebel groups boasted at the time that powerful TOW antitank missiles provided by American and Saudi intelligence operatives were a key to their success. For several years, the C.I.A. has joined with the spy services of several Arab nations to arm and train the rebels at bases in Jordan and Qatar, with the Saudis bankrolling much of the operation.

And, theoretically, since we have the GOP constantly telling us that the popular vote does not matter, that we live in a representative republic, not a democracy, and that the Electoral College was put in place to avoid the crazed masses of democracy, I say, okay, I'm all for it.

So, screw the popular vote in Pa., Mich. and Wisconsin, and let's let the wise men Electors decide--just the way the founders envisioned. It is only the custom that the electors vote the way their state voted.  The Russians and Comey rigged this election.  The GOP lost the popular vote.  I can't think of a more apt reason, or a better situation, for the Electors to exercise their independent judgment.

Best Motion Picture, Drama:

• "Hacksaw Ridge"
  
• "Hell or High Water"
  
• "Manchester by the Sea"
  
• "Moonlight"
  
• "Lion"

• "20th Century Women"
  
• "Deadpool"
  
• "Florence Foster Jenkins"
  
• "La La Land"
  
• "Sing Street"

"Excuse me, but isn't that sign misspelled?" asks Big Ed.

The employee stares back at the sign again for a second, and then responds, "S-U-C-K-S. Sucks. No, sir, that's right."

But that "computation error" (yeh, d'ya think? that doesn't explain it) was a reason for support for the request for a recount, in addition to the serious concerns raised by a cybersecurity expert.

Not that those concerns were sufficiently addressed, with denial of a hand recount.  Some hand recounting occurred, but not where most votes were cast.

Why do you know more than a dozen intelligence agencies (only in this country; more overseas)?

Why do you think even GOP congressmen now are calling for release of the findings from the investigations?

i believe they are refering to those embarrassing emails that (many people feel) show that the DNC was not acting in good faith with bernie sanders.

"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow -- the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

"Some states have also recently seen scanning and probing of their election-related systems, which in most cases originated from servers operated by a Russian company. However, we are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government. The USIC and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assess that it would be extremely difficult for someone, including a nation-state actor, to alter actual ballot counts or election results by cyber attack or intrusion. This assessment is based on the decentralized nature of our election system in this country and the number of protections state and local election officials have in place. States ensure that voting machines are not connected to the Internet, and there are numerous checks and balances as well as extensive oversight at multiple levels built into our election process." (Emphasis is mine.)

The fact that both the DHS and USIC continue to stand by this contention will have to suffice for now. The information you seek, if it exists, remains classified because its likely an ongoing investigation.

If that's not good enough for you, well, too bad. You can fuss and fume all you want. The world isn't going to stop and turn on your individual opinions, any more than it will on mine. And you don't get to set and define the parameters by which everyone else must determine what's acceptable evidence and what is not.

Save perhaps for admittedly partisan motivations, I've no rationale for not taking the USIC at its word at this juncture, and neither do you. I know it's currently fashionable in some circles to say why should we trust the IC now when it was wrong about Iraq and WMD, but that's just the result of the GOP rewriting its own sorry chapter of history and then believing its own bullschitt.

The fact of the matter is that the IC wasn't wrong about Iraq; George Tenet and Colin Powell were, because the Bush administration chose to cherry-pick select data from what information there was in order to spin a case for war. And then when their premise was exposed as false, they hastened to blame and scapegoat the IC analysts.

If the IC says that the Russian government was behind an effort to tip the election, we ought to take that very seriously, regardless of whoever's in charge of the White House. Who's to say that the Kremlin won't attempt to do the same thing to the GOP next time around, if Putin find it in his regime's best interest to screw the Republicans' pooch?

New York Times | December 13, 2016
How Moscow Aimed a Perfect Weapon at the U.S. Election - "When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.

"His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named 'the Dukes,' a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.

[...]

"It was the cryptic first sign of a cyberespionage and information-warfare campaign devised to disrupt the 2016 presidential election, the first such attempt by a foreign power in American history. What started as an information-gathering operation, intelligence officials believe, ultimately morphed into an effort to harm one candidate, Hillary Clinton, and tip the election to her opponent, Donald J. Trump.

"Like another famous American election scandal, it started with a break-in at the D.N.C. The first time, 44 years ago at the committee's old offices in the Watergate complex, the burglars planted listening devices and jimmied a filing cabinet. This time, the burglary was conducted from afar, directed by the Kremlin, with spear-phishing emails and zeros and ones.

"An examination by The Times of the Russian operation -- based on interviews with dozens of players targeted in the attack, intelligence officials who investigated it and Obama administration officials who deliberated over the best response -- reveals a series of missed signals, slow responses and a continuing underestimation of the seriousness of the cyberattack."