This is a completely misleading and false statement:
“It confirmed what many already knew — the Russian government orchestrated the hacking of DNC computers in an attempt to influence the election.”
It “confirmed” nothing of the kind. Who are the “many”? What if anything do “they” claim to know?
The alleged “memos” and their purported “leaking” could just as easily be a well crafted contrivance commissioned by anti-Trump campaigners who have far more to lose under a Trump administration than Putin would ever gain. Anyone who believes that such noise will drive a wedge between the President and the intelligence community simply lacks the intelligence to make such an assessment.
The 35 pages of “memos” themselves are highly suspect and contains nothing more than unsupported and unverified allegations. One only has to properly order the pages and actually read the memos to draw that conclusion.
As to the allegations themselves, whether or not Trump or his campaign engaged in discussions with the Russians is highly irrelevant unless you want to delude yourself into believing that only the President and the Secretary of State are “allowed” to engage in discussions with Putin and Kremlin bureaucrats. In that case, the Clintons have had access to the Russians for decades. Why be alarmed then if Trump or his “team” did the same.
The story is noise, not news. It’s a weapon of mass distraction. It has spawned stories and analyses about the stories and analyses. The level of hysteria is underwhelming and a poor reflection on those to stupid to know better or too lazy to do the reasearch and to see it for what it is.
For every “former” analyst who claim the memos contain credible intel, I’ll show you 5 more who believe it’s mostly crap. Yet why is it then that the pro-credibility analyses are getting all the press? I’m sure it has nothing to do with driving eyes to their content and generating profitable revenue therefrom. So much for unbiased journalism.