In late October, shortly after FBI Director James Comey’s second stunning intrusion into the campaign between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid accused Comey of violating federal law that prohibits government employees from using their official powers to electioneer.

The basis of Reid’s claim wasn’t simply that Comey had made multiple public comments about FBI inquiries into Clinton’s email practices, but that he employed a double standard with respect to the two candidates. “In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors and the Russian government,” Reid wrote, “yet you continue to resist calls to inform the public.”

“By contrast,” Reid added, “as soon as you came into possession of the slightest innuendo related to Secretary Clinton, you rushed to publicize it in the most negative possible light.”

It is a similar, conspicuous dual standard for the treatment of private information that has reportedly led the Central Intelligence Agency in recent days to conclude that the Russian government intervened in the election not just to sow public uncertainty and suspicion, but to help Trump defeat Clinton.

“They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding,” according to The New York Times, “that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.”