www.cnn.com/2016/10/12/politics/florida-election-hack/ Oct 12, 2016 - Federal investigators believe Russian hackers were behind cyberattacks on a contractor for Florida's election system that may have exposed the personal data ...

I do not see a single Russian source in this list. Don't take my word for it. Try it yourself. Do a Google search, select the custom date feature and set the search for 1 February 2016 thru 8 November 2016.

Much of the contrived hysteria about alleged Russian interference in our electoral process is downright nonsensical. I listened to Senator Warner's charges in disbelief

As the hearing begins let’s take just one moment to review what we already know. Russia’s President Vladamir Putin ordered a deliberate campaign carefully constructed to undermine our election. First, Russia struck at our political institutions by electronically breaking into the headquarters of one of our political parties and stealing vast amounts of information. Russian operatives also hacked e-mails to steal personal messages and other information from individuals ranging from Clinton campaign manager John Podesta to former Secretary of state Colin Powell. This stolen information was then weaponized.”

Weaponized? If you recall, and again, don't take my word for it, the bulk of attention was not focused on the DNC emails and the Podesta emails; instead the majority of the email stories focused on Hillary Clinton's illegal use of a private server. Just do a Google Search using the customized date feature and you will see that the coverage of the DNC emails and Podesta emails was largely ignored by most of the media.

The claim that Russia's propaganda outlets--RT and Sputnik News--along with "paid internet trolls" undermined the terrific campaign of that outstanding candidate, Hillary Clinton, only requires that you suspend all intelligent thought, develop Alzheimer's disease and refuse to look at any facts. Ignore the fact that Hillary Clinton did not spend much time or money in places like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Ignore the dissembling that Hillary engaged in with regards to her use of private emails and a personal server. Ignore her shrill voice and robotic appearance. Ignore her passing out on 11 September 2016. Ignore all of this and just blame the Russians for the Democrat debacle.

I continue to look for actual facts. Who were the paid trolls? How much were they paid? What articles of "fake" news took over the media coverage?

If you actually look at the facts about media coverage we can only conclude that the Russians were getting their ass kicked by traditional media. Politico reported

A whopping 91 percent of news coverage about Donald Trump on the three broadcast nightly newscasts over the past 12 weeks has been 'hostile', a new study finds. The study, conducted by the conservative Media Research Center, found that not only has Trump received significantly more broadcast network news coverage than his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, but nearly all of that coverage (91%) has been hostile, according to the study. In addition, the networks spent far more airtime focusing on the personal controversies involving Trump, such as his treatment of women, than controversies surrounding Clinton, such as her email practices or the Clinton Foundation.

Joe Concha, in an article that appeared on the Hill last October, made the same point

Quick review: The broadcast evening news programs on ABC, NBC and CBS covered allegations against Trump by several women who claim he sexually assaulted them for more than 23 minutes combined on Thursday night.

But revelations in the WikiLeaks email dump of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta — which included derogatory comments by senior campaign officials about Catholics, Latinos and the NAACP, sympathy for Wall Street, advocation for open borders and blatant examples of media collusion with said campaign — got a whole 1 minute and 7 seconds combined. Ratio of negative coverage of Trump vs. Clinton: 23:1.

In print on Thursday, it was no better. The New York Times — known as the paper of record — had 11 negative stories on Trump, including one in the sports section. But zero on Clinton/WikiLeaks. Ratio: 11:0.

So while it's understood the Trump allegations are an easier sell because sex always triumphs over substance, 23:1 and 11:0 is a prime example of a media that has gone off the rails with no hope of redeeming itself for some time, if ever.

Russia is not the adversary that we faced during the Cold War. The Russia of the post-Communist era is a different beast. But it appears that very few of our current leaders, both Republicans and Democrats, do not want to hear that and are choosing instead to paint Russia as an implacable foe. That is not only ignorant, but dangerous. Let's focus on facts.