Good reply. Additionally, let us assume for one moment that agents of the Russian government did attempt to sway the election in Trump’s favor by stealing and delivering some emails to Wikileaks - an assertion that Wikileaks denies. Is that a problem which requires a remedy? If so, what is that remedy? I frankly don’t see a problem. American voters are subject to a multitude of influences during the course of a campaign. In fact, that is what any number of people attempt to do. But, if it is a problem, what should the remedy be? A new election? When would we stop? When would we know that any given election had been sufficiently free of “influences?” Should the College of Electors be informed as to the nature and source of each such influence? If the answer to that question is yes, who should determine which influences are disclosed to them, how the influences are described and to whom they should be ascribed? However, if the answer to that question is that there should be some sort of disclosure to the Electors by someone of some number of influences on the campaign, what should the Electors do with that information? Exercise independent judgment, in many cases in contravention of State law? It seems to me that many of the folks that now seem to want the Electors to consider an assertion by an unnamed “senior administration official” that the CIA has concluded that persons associated with the Russian government tried to sway the election in Trump’s favor by releasing some but not all of the emails they allegedly stole are the same folks who are condemning the whole concept of the Electoral College as undemocratic. When considered in this light, one must conclude that this whole issue is just and exercise in partisanship on the part of the Democrats and the media. It’s goal must be either to cause the Electors to be faithless - in which case it will fail - or to cast a cloud over the Trump Presidency ala Bush 2000. They will attempt to make it the equivalent of the “he was selected not elected” theme. In fact, that is what it is just with “the Russians” substituted for the Supreme Court.
That seems like a bigger issue than any effect some foreign entity could have had.
The group of people best suited to weigh all the evidence, statements, advertisements, newspaper articles, etc. already did so on Nov. 8th. Each member of that group had their own opinion of what information was true and relevant, regardless of how they came to have the information they did.