In a court of law, rules of evidentiary procudure apply such that one side is not unfairly disadvantaged,
or advantaged, by unequal law or process.
No, not always perfectly, but that's the ideal.
An outside, increasingly hostile, power, apparently having the inner-sanctum secrets on two major political parties, but choosing, selectively, to leak the goods on only one, is not evenly informing "the public" (or anyone else) on the true scope of issues at play.
One element of which is in fact that foreign adversary's exceptionally un-equal thumb on the scale. Though there's considerably more than that.
Your responses strike me as ill considered, at best, deliberately so at worst.
A good test is to see how you'd apply the rules or criteria were the situation reversed: the DNC colluding with, say, Russia or China, to hack the GOP, and to disclose damaging information in the immediate run-up to the election.
