No evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC server and released DNC emails

A key aspect of the whole fake Russian collusion story has been that Russia hacked the DNC server and released DNC emails to impact the election.

As an aside given that the emails that were released were accurate and that they showed that the DNC was breaking its own rules to ensure that Bernie Sanders didn't get the nomination wouldn't it be good for the American voters to know that?

Apparently releasing secrets is only bad in the mind of Democrats when it hurts other people.  Hiding the truth from the voters however is a good thing according to Democrats.

But there's always been a lot of suspicion about the whole Russian hacking story for the following reasons:

• Forensic data indicated that the files that were "hacked" were downloaded at far too fast a rate to have been downloaded via the Internet; it looked like someone physically accessed the computer which isn't what the Democrats were saying
• The DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the "hacked" computers
• The DNC brought in an outside company, CrowdStrike, which declared that the Russians did it; given that the DNC was paying them their conclusion that was what the DNC wanted to hear is obviously questionable.

Now newly released evidence that Adam Schiff had been concealing since 2017 reveals that in fact the private company that declared the Russians hacked the DNC server didn't have evidence to back up their claim.

In fact back in 2017 the President of CrowdStrike, and the man who personally headed the investigation into the DNC "hack", Shawn Henry testified under oath that:

"We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC [servers], but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated,"

The CrowdStrike argument seems to be that there were indications of a hack so there must have been one even though they could find no evidence that any data was actually exfiltrated. But Henry admitted that usually there would be signs that the data had been sent:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."

The reason that this is critical is that for years now we've been told by Schiff, Mueller, and the #FakeNews media that it is an unequivocal fact that the Russians hacked the DNC emails and then released them to hurt Hillary's chances of being elected.

But it turns out that while this isn't unequivocal proof that the Russians didn't hack the DNC it's also true that the "fact" that has been touted for years is in fact nothing more than speculation by people who the DNC was paying.

Given that Hillary was very soft on Russia when she was Secretary of State, she "reset" the US relationship with Russia in spite of Russia continuing to hold parts of the country of Georgia it had conquered in an unprovoked war, it's unclear why Putin would have wanted Trump, at best a wild card, to be elected.