I can't say the same for Wikileaks. That is where it started when they were clear about their sources not being Russia or a State 4 months ago long before this hacking scapegoat stuff started.

Russia was suspected immediately, long before the person trying to affect the election tried to deflect the accusation by claiming it wasn't Russia.

If we are talking HACKING then that is a technical act. Therefore, if that piece is disproved then why wouldn't it be a SMEAR CAMPAIGN?

Except you didn't disprove it, you claimed it was impossible for that to be enough evidence by itself.

Meanwhile the intelligence community is analyzing intercepted communications: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=3&utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

Yet they have stated the voting machines are not compromised.

Complete and utter non-sequitor. Voting machines are far more secure than DNC servers.

Leaking the TRUTH is not hacking.

Telling a story is not HACKING.

And you're just confusing the issue even more. The "truth" that was leaked was obtained by hacking. Moreover the "truth" was told only about one side, and then blown way out of proportion with people taking things out of context or making wild logical leaps about the contents. Such as Podesta receiving an email by a UFO enthusiast leading people to believe Hillary was talking to aliens.