Was damaging information about a candidate made public? Yes.
Does the substance of that information matter at all, or simply that it was released?
"Hacked the election" is ridiculous. As if these people[0], or any other midwest-Obama-voter-turned-Trump voter needed WikiLeaks to tell them they were unhappy with the way things were going, had economic anxiety, and didn't see anyone but Trump speaking to their concerns, or simply didn't vote. What Vladimir Putin or Julian Assange wanted, never factored into their decision.
No evidence that Russia was WikiLeaks source has ever been presented, has it? We certainly DID learn from WikiLeaks that the DNC and media "fixed" the debates to favor Hillary Clinton though[1], but where's the outrage at that?
Was damaging information about a candidate made public? Yes.
Does the substance of that information matter at all, or simply that it was released?
"Hacked the election" is ridiculous. As if these people[0], or any other midwest-Obama-voter-turned-Trump voter needed WikiLeaks to tell them they were unhappy with the way things were going, had economic anxiety, and didn't see anyone but Trump speaking to their concerns, or simply didn't vote. What Vladimir Putin or Julian Assange wanted, never factored into their decision.
No evidence that Russia was WikiLeaks source has ever been presented, has it? We certainly DID learn from WikiLeaks that the DNC and media "fixed" the debates to favor Hillary Clinton though[1], but where's the outrage at that?
[0] https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/trump-politics-and-option-p...
[1] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donna-brazile-final...