The 5-Minute Fix from The Washington Post

Keeping up with politics is easy now

By Amber Phillips

Since The Washington Post reported Friday that the CIA thinks Russia tried to help Donald Trump win, the finger-pointing has intensified about what Russia did (or didn't do) to mess with the U.S. presidential election.

While it's tough to ever be 100 percent sure of anything, here are two things our intelligence officials say they are 99 percent sure of when it comes to Russia:

1. Russia did not tamper with actual votes: Most voting machines are offline, making it nearly impossible to hack into our actual elections system in any systemic way. "It would be very difficult to alter a ballot count in any one place and have a significant consequence,'' Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told the USA Today in November.

In this Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2016 photo, voters fill out their general election ballots at a polling place in Bradfordton, Ill. The state where both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton used to live may still be reliably Democratic when it comes to picking a president. But drill a little deeper, and it's clear how much things changed even in Illinois on Tuesday, just like they did elsewhere in the U.S. Donald Trump won a dozen more counties than Mitt Romney did in 2012, and he won several counties that went for Obama four years ago, including a county that hasn't backed the GOP presidential candidate in at least a quarter century.(AP Photo/Seth Perlman-File)

Voters in Illinois.(AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

1. Russia did hack into Democrats' emails: In October, Obama national security officials said the Russian government was behind hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta throughout the campaign.

Many of those leaked emails were politically embarrassing; some had direct implications: Former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.) resigned a day before Democrats' convention after emails indicated some supposedly neutral DNC staffers launched a coordinated effort to undermine Bernie Sanders in the primary.

Democratic National Committee Chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, at the Democratic convention in 2012.(AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a casualty of the Russian hacks. (Lynne Sladky/AP)

But if we know Russia hacked Democrats, there are competing theories about why. Here are three of them:

1. Russia tried to help Donald Trump win: In a secret report made not-so-secret Friday, the CIA concluded that Russia went further than just trying to mess with U.S. elections; they were doing it to help Trump to win.

"It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected," an anonymous, senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation told The Post.

A man types on a computer keyboard in Warsaw in this February 28, 2013 illustration file picture. High-level Chinese hackers recently tried to break into a key Canadian computer system, forcing Ottawa to isolate it from the main government network, a senior official said on July 29, 2014. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel/Files (POLAND - Tags: BUSINESS SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY)

(Reuters)

2. Russia may have tried to help Trump win, but we don't know yet: The FBI isn't yet sure we can say what Russia's intentions were when it hacked into Democrats' emails. From The Post's Ellen Nakashima and Adam Entous: "The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior."

3. Russia didn't help Trump win: This comes not from our intelligence officials but from president-elect Trump, who says the notion that Russia tried to help him is "ridiculous" and "just another excuse" by Democrats who are sore they lost.

Which brings us to ...

Trump's dog in the Russia fight

TrumpCIA

Trump is dismissing the intelligence above out of hand. From a national security perspective, that's potentially worrisome. From a purely political perspective, it makes sense. After all, it's his victory that risks being called into question.

Trump won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — three key states that helped him win the electoral college and thus the presidency — by less than a percentage point in each state. That's the equivalent of four tiny dark blue dots in the seat of light blue dots, below:

(Philip Bump/The Washington Post)

The White House said there's no reason to think that Russia actually tipped the election for Trump. But given how close the race was in those key states, it's a question some will ask nonetheless.

Which means the longer questions about Russia's involvement in Trump's election are raised, the more Trump's presidency risks being undermined in the court of public opinion.

And that's why we're on high alert for intraparty warfare if Republicans in Congress launch an investigation into Russia's hacking, which Trump has made clear he doesn't want. (Upping the potential for drama: The powerful Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) threw his support behind an investigation Monday.)

No, this won't change who won the presidency

(Philip Bump / The Washington Post)

The Russia news has given new momentum to an effort to get members of the electoral college to a) get a briefing about Russia before they vote on the president b) change their vote for president. Clinton's campaign chair, Podesta, threw his support behind this idea Monday. But it's a total fantasy for Clinton supporters.

For one, electors are often bound by state laws to vote for the winner of the popular vote in that state. And in enough of those states, that winner was Trump.

And two, those who can change their mind aren't. Yes, there was that elector down in Texas, Christopher Suprun, who said he wouldn't vote for Trump. But Clinton supporters (or Trump haters) would need to change the minds of 38 more people to change the results. The clock is ticking, and that's not happening.

As The Fix's Philip Bump succinctly put it: "The month-old effort to flip electoral votes has resulted in one flipped vote." The electoral college votes Dec. 19, with "no indicator anyone else is wavering."

Whatever the Electoral College -- or anyone else of significance does -- we'll keep you updated. Thanks for reading!

Happy Dance, Monday's over!

If you’re a new 5-Minute Fix reader, sign up here. If you’re a regular, forward this to anyone you think wants to sounds like they know what they’re talking about in 2016. And don’t forget to follow me on Twitter, which is where I take suggestions on gifs!

Thumb not tired yet // trying to avoid someone? Read these awesome pieces:

Swampwatch: The overlap between Trump’s Cabinet and the world of high finance

Three Goldman alums and six others who've worked in finance.

By Philip Bump • Read more »