Yes, you have been repeating this. You have yet to demonstrate how anything was "sabotaged", even if all allegations about what Russia did are true. If releasing true information is 'sabotage' then we have a problem far worse than Russia on our hands.
The issue is neither the hack nor the release of plausibly true information damaging to Democrats, but the selectivity of the hack-release in order to damage just one Party. People who support the purported Russian actions are also somehow comfortable that no such hack-release was made about Republicans. That's why I continually point out the partisan inference for support of the attack against only one Party.
I'm not really seeing the problem here. I'm under no impression that foreign governments are required to be non-partisan in their dealings with my own nations internal politics, or the internal politics of any other nation. I expect they will act in what they view to be their own self-interest. For good, and for ill, so far as it impacts both us and them.
I likewise cannot truthfully get upset at Russia for hacking the DNC servers, as I'm nearly dead certain the United States is still doing the same thing in other nations right now, and has been doing so since there were e-mail servers to hack. As such my "outrage" on that specific matter is rather muted.
I fully support and will go so far as to endorse our own intelligence services continuing to undertake such practices. As such, I'd be a rank hypocrite if I was going to denounce Russia simply on the grounds of their successfully hacking the DNC servers.
Likewise, as previously stated, simply because they had the information does not "prove" that they were the source from which that information became public. That still remains the "weakest leak" in the whole chain that you're going on about.
But even if we suppose that they were the source. The information released was true and accurate as far as we can tell. It isn't misinformation, and it isn't propaganda in any traditional sense of the term. So that further mutes anything I can object over.
That they (might have) released the information is rather gauche and in poor form/taste, but it has been done, and you're pretty much crying over spilled milk. Nothing you or I can do is going to put the genie back in the proverbial bottle.
In a perfect world, "consequences" would be nice, but again, as has also been discussed. I don't think Trump was their ideal candidate either, particularly if he carries out his pledge to rebuild&build up US Military strength. They don't want a stronger US Military in the hands of the
next President. It just happens that Hillary Clinton was such an unpalatable candidate that instead of their tendency to stay out of things but generally be quietly supportive of the Democrats, they switched to the Republicans this cycle. They'll probably be back to very quietly supporting the Democrats soon enough, once they get over their current bout of Russo-phobia.
Then again, with how the DNC shifted over the past few years, when paired with where the Russians have gone in the same intervening time, perhaps they have parted ways permanently at this stage. Only time will tell on that front I guess. I'm thinking they're just likely to be more mercenary about which US party they're going to be friendlier towards going forward, they(The Russian Government under Putin) now have some degree of overlap with both parties now, rather than only one.
