There are people who are working on the case saying things like "this looks like Russia" and those are the front line people. They know wtf they're talking about because they're the ones looking through the evidence while some officials pace back and forth while they write their statements and get paid 20x as much.

At this point, any evidence pointing to Russia will be met with responses like "I'm still waiting for evidence that Russia is behind this," or "I need to see this quote unquote evidence myself..."

I gotta admit though, they have apparently really honed their English grammar. Can't use that technique to detect them anymore.

> They know wtf they're talking about because they're the ones looking through the evidence

Show me it then.

> I gotta admit though, they have apparently really honed their English grammar.

Maybe that's because what you're insinuating is false and you refuse to believe it? Also, you've still not outwardly said what you are insinuating. You're still beating around the bush. So I'll say it for you: "anyone who asks for evidence is a Russian shill." That's what you're getting at, right?

Yes, that's what I'm getting at. I thought it was clear.

The first story on HN about this linked to an article which said that investigators saw what looked like them to be clearly "Russian" in the techniques used, based on their own previous experience.

I will trust a reporter over a random HN commenter any day of any year.