Great catch, Will. Here's the improved version:
*High confidence indicates judgments based on high-quality information, and/or the nature of the issue makes it possible to render a solid judgment. However, high confidence judgments still carry small-to-negligible risk of being wrong.
Much better.
I, for one, am highly amused watching you Trumpapologists having to come up with innocent explanation after innocent explanation for the virtual armory of smoking guns that this corrupt and incompetent cabal has left strewn about the political playing field. The usual tactic is in play - explain one at a time, each in its own context, then scream bloody murder when anyone points out that your myriad "explanations" are not only non-consilient, but are contradictory.
It's a hoot!
That's what Crowdstrike originally said. On a closer look this high confidence turns out was based on posts of pro-russian trolls on some crimean blog. That's a source of their high confidence now . They have not examined any supposedly hacked cellphones/tablets, they have not talked to the authors of that program, Ukrainian Army denies any claims of hacking or unusual losses of any artillery equipment. Bottom line, Source of US intelligence high confidence is probably some 14 year old who has nothing else to do but troll on the internet.
That does not look like an error, it looks like complete fabrication. Crowdstrike report is most likely a complte and utter fabrication.
Crowdstrike were caught lying in one part of the report, that makes them and their reports not credible. And since when I have to acknowledge the wrongs of the Trump campaign? I am here to point out wrongs of anti-trump campaign which are extensive however less obvious than Trump campaign wrongs.
