> Wikileaks exposed a few (not all that many, but some) shady actions on the part of the DNC, the media, as well as shining some light on HRC's true views on is

> Wikileaks exposed a few (not all that many, but some) shady actions on the part of the DNC, the media, as well as shining some light on HRC's true views on issues (having a "private" and "public" position, corporate speeches, Clinton Foundation donations, etc.) All in all, not that big of a deal. Really? Because I know for a fact that tons of people jumped on those leaks to say that Hillary was untrustworthy. They absolutely exacerbated the rift between Bernie and Hillary supporters. This is how swaying elections works, by pushing a specific narrative. When that "dirty laundry" (nothing illegal) is illegally dug up by a rival nation state, you think nothing is wrong? There's nothing to look into here? No, we don't have definite evidence of collusion yet, but why don't you ask the FBI which is actively investigating Trump? This isn't Pizzagate. This is happening: the intelligence community already knows that Russia was behind the WikiLeaks hacks, and now they have found Trump suspicious enough to be worthy of investigation. You can't handwave that away.