>>>John, please, could you point to the source showing FBI (not CIA) saying there was hacked Republican stuff...? I'm honestly interested.
>
>What's your understanding of the logic that the Russians hacking was directed to damage HRC? Is hacked Republican dirt necessary for this determination or not?
>
I am not sure what you're asking, but I'll respond to what I think you mean. More argumentation and evidence is needed to prove whether the Russian hacking was directed to damage HRC, but the "hacked Republican dirt" is not the only single thing to make this determination, nor is it a condition sine qua non.
*
I see you updated your response.I already responded to the content above in a previous post...

>Also - did you see that former British ambassador Craig Murray said he met the person who gave HRC's emails to Wikileaks and they were from the DNC? IOW an inside job, nothing to do with Russia?
>
>If this is true- then what do you suppose the eagerness to blame Russia, is going to do to international relations?

If it is true, then that would settle it, though I still think that at this point it's wise to wait for the FBI report. This stuff could have implications far beyond the claim that "Russians hacked DNC".
As for the international relations, they have been protected when Trump's stated pre-emptively that all this is "ridiculous" :)
*