[redm]

I find it interesting that no one is discussing the fact that the DNC's leaks were damaging only because they were not operating impartially. Regardless if the leaks came from Russia or a whistleblower in the DNC, isn't the fallout somewhat self inflicted?

[grandalf]

Yes, and the only reason I was interested in the leaked information was because of the transparency it provided into the DNC and Clinton Foundation.

In a democracy, transparency is a good thing.

There are still a variety of things that were in the emails pertaining to campaign finance violations and DOJ improprieties that have essentially been ignored. Regardless of how the American people came to know about these things, they should be the focus of the investigation.

[tootie]

That's beside the point of the hacking. If a foreign nation deliberately interfered in our electoral system to the benefit or possibly in collusion with their preferred party, that's a way bigger deal. It's criminal.

Secondly, the amount of dirt they uncovered was so minimal. Of course they favored Clinton. She was a party loyalist and the one they considered most likely to win the general. If you think both parties don't operate like this all the time, you're nuts. They'd be nuts not to. I can't even imagine the level of freak out at the RNC when Trump took the lead.

[prostoalex]

Yep, the most severe outcome of a similar hacking of Macron's campaign in France was an extreme amount of boredom the leaks induced.