And yet they did have leaks about the RNC that weren't released. Why?

I mean, dirt on Trump isn't hard to come by - are you claiming that not once has anyone sent Wikileaks negative information on him or his campaign, and that's the only reason we haven't seen any?

> I think you wanted Wikileaks to suppress the information there and they didn’t.

To be unequivocally clear - The DNC is corrupt to its very soul. Whatever you or I think of Bernie Sanders, the way they handled the whole Sanders/Clinton situation is despicable and vile and an insult to the members of the party they purport to lead. And the fact that Debbie Wasserman-Schulz was running the Clinton campaign, effectively, less than 24 hours after being finally forced out of DNC leadership, to me just demonstrates that those theories were accurate.

> The content of the emails was the problem not Wikileaks for publishing truth.

Yes.

The other problem is Wikileaks sitting on OTHER email contents and choosing NOT to publish them AND communicating with political candidates on what they'd like to see leaked and not, and when.