> They wanted mania, and used tactics that would contribute towards a Clinton loss, even if the chances of it were remote.
It's at least plausible that, at least originally, defeating Clinton wasn't a goal, weakening and dividing the US as a whole and the expected next President’s public and Congressional support might have been the whole goal. Actually causing her defeat may be a happy accident from the Russian POV (or a bit of a unhappy one that required escalating efforts to promote disunity, because in the short-term, even if the administration produced was not particularly popular, there was the risk of accidental strength from executive-legislative partisan alignment.)
It's at least plausible that, at least originally, defeating Clinton wasn't a goal, weakening and dividing the US as a whole and the expected next President’s public and Congressional support might have been the whole goal. Actually causing her defeat may be a happy accident from the Russian POV (or a bit of a unhappy one that required escalating efforts to promote disunity, because in the short-term, even if the administration produced was not particularly popular, there was the risk of accidental strength from executive-legislative partisan alignment.)