My take: It isn't so much anger, or contempt. The whole power structure in several major agencies, news outlets and a certain political party are scared. Scared of something massive.
They abandoned the gun issue for this with almost no transition. I am thinking that Biden blabbed something big. Either payola, or, as you mentioned, something to do with how the DNC was "Hacked."
In the Wikileaks case, I have always wondered about this. The "Talking heads" in the Media and the Democratic Party said that it was a "Hack." Well, this wasn't Wikileaks' Modus Operandi in either of their two previous high profile leak cases.
In the Bradley/Chelsea Manning case with the Army and the Edward Snowden case in the NSA, they got people inside. They turned people and had them work as moles, either using their access or pushing to access stuff a bit beyond their clearance, and then passing the data out physically. Flash drives, that sort of thing. That isn't "Hacking, in the sense of some guy, or gal, in a hoodie sitting in a basement somewhere with 20 big screens doing a "Matrix" style waterfall thing. It's good, old school, reliable use of Moles.
So, I always figured, where would Wikileaks suddenly get all this hacking help from the Russians, never mind going to that whole length of trying a new tactic, with the increased chances of someone twigging to it and them getting caught? Why not just do what they had always done? Why not just try to use a mole, when they had been so successful in cultivating them in Government Agencies, which were not only more known for secrecy protocols than campaigns, but had actual on the books no-joke penalties they could use to deter a would-be Mole? Why not just try to cultivate a mole? If I think of the most likely way that I would have gone about getting into the Democratic National Committee's files, as Wikileaks in 2015 or 2016, I would pick the way that had proven most successful before.
I have always found the idea that Wikileaks did just that to be a very hard idea for me to shake.
A lot of people are scared of something, something big. Something they don't seem to be chancing a year's wait on. After all, we keep hearing that the issues of guns and other social matters are winners, and that people are ready to reject Trump at the polls. Why go this hard?
On the part of the Media, I can only surmise: Let's say that some of the most highly placed folks "In the chain" knew that they had reported something bogus, knowingly, like the "Russia hack" thing. What would they be willing to do to try and prevent that information from becoming public?
Again, this is all what-if. It does make me think, though. Someone seems scared of something big. Javlin, you might be on to something.
There is something potentially bigger out there, something I have also considered for a while. Not sure if I should post it here, because it gets pretty far into the weeds of "Conspiracy theory" territory.