No national intelligence agency has suggested that they did. “Hacking the election” means that the Russians (or somebody) managed to hack the actual voting machines, and/or (1) changed people’s votes, or (2) inserted votes that were never cast.
Basically…..because of various technical reasons…..that’s basically impossible to have been done with a “hack”. Nothing’s TOTALLY impossible, of course, but this one is pretty close to “I got struck by lighting on two consecutive sunny days.”
What Russia (or somebody) did was get into the DNC and Clinton campaign email servers, find some often humorous and generally embarrassing emails there, and released them through Wikileaks or other outlets.
So, in other words, some people are getting very upset because we the voters might have had more accurate information than they wanted us to have when we voted. :-) And they think that’s a problem. :-)
Don’t misunderstand me, now. Security breaches matter. Foreign governments cyberspying on other foreign governments matter. We should know. We do it too. Remember when we hacked Angela Merkel’s Blackberry?
Angela Merkel's call to Obama: are you bugging my mobile phone?
The furore over the scale of American mass surveillance revealed by Edward Snowden shifted to an incendiary new level…
(Of course, two years later, the Germans decided “there was no credible evidence that we hacked her cellphone. Decide who you want to believe.)
But this matter is now being presented by irresponsible parties as if the a release of a bunch of emails swung the election. That’s a different matter entirely.
And, I repeat….irresponsible. If you have evidence that vote totals in WI, MI, or PA were altered by cybercrooks…..we’ll talk, because that changes things.
But there’s no evidence of that at this time. None.