As far as 'why do this if there was no 'real' influence on the election', I think the attempt to interfere is reason enough, successful or not. (After all, you can still be charged with "attempted murder", no?) It demanded a response; and no one seems to doubt that the same thing is happening wholesale in Europe's elections. So the skepticism and tut-tutting here, particularly given Putin/Russia's strange recent popularity among the American right wing, seems like a remnant of something from a few decades ago. And I think Obama understands Russia's position fairly well: in every category except nuclear readiness, they're weak, and their asymmetric psyop campaign, while possibly effective, is proof. Putin has already declared he won't expel US diplomats and will just wait for the new 'friendly' administration. Not the best look for he or Trump; makes the possible collusion between them even more glaring.
As far as 'why do this if there was no 'real' influence on the election', I think the attempt to interfere is reason enough, successful or not. (After all, you can still be charged with "attempted murder", no?) It demanded a response; and no one seems to doubt that the same thing is happening wholesale in Europe's elections. So the skepticism and tut-tutting here, particularly given Putin/Russia's strange recent popularity among the American right wing, seems like a remnant of something from a few decades ago. And I think Obama understands Russia's position fairly well: in every category except nuclear readiness, they're weak, and their asymmetric psyop campaign, while possibly effective, is proof. Putin has already declared he won't expel US diplomats and will just wait for the new 'friendly' administration. Not the best look for he or Trump; makes the possible collusion between them even more glaring.