Greenwald, referencing Masha Gessen article, suggests that the attention focused on the source of the Clinton email leaks and ongoing concerns about Trump's purported affiliation with Russia has become a conspiracy trap.
She now has a new article in the New York Review of Books – entitled “Russia: the Conspiracy Trap” – that I cannot recommend highly enough. Its primary purpose is to describe, and warn about, the insane and toxic conspiracy-mongering about Russia that has taken over not the fringe, dark corners of the internet that normally traffic in such delusional tripe, but rather mainstream U.S. media outlets and the Democratic Party. Few articles have illustrated the serious, multi-faceted dangers of what has become this collective mania in the U.S. as well as Gessen’s does.
Flipping this around a bit on Greenwald, isn't it the case that we should reserve the phrase conspiracy theory until there is confirmation of who the players are in the leaks and other assorted claims. If Greenwald and Intercept have evidence that there is no Russian interference, then they should present the evidence. If you haven't found the evidence, then you can't be calling it a conspiracy theory as you are only fuelling the situation.
The damage inflected by calling this a conspiracy should not be factored into the equation. Focus on the Russia question may detract from critiques on Trump and Republican's other actions, but that is not the question. The question is how do we move forward in understanding the role of Russia in election of Trump.