You say there was "hacking of election related systems"? What happened? Maybe I'm just out of the loop?
It doesn't seem to be in doubt there was a conspiracy, although it is probable that all of the consequences are not mentioned in this indictment. The indictment mentions other states, but focuses on Florida.
https://www.vox.com/2018/7/13/17568806/mueller-russia-intell...
And that's where I wonder why at the outset of an investigation into whether voting-machines have been tampered with, the Russian state should be assumed to have done it.
You're certainly not alone in your doubts. Many people have assiduously been not assuming Russians had anything to do with tampering with the election every step of the way. Guccifer 2.0 was supposed to be a random Romanian hacker and yet it is now confirmed he was a member of the Russian military team attacking the US.
It's not helpful to dismiss stuff as a conspiracy theory these days in a general sort of way. The reason is that disbelieving one "conspiracy theory" requires you to believe in another, larger one. If you don't believe in the indictment, you are necessarily positing a massive conspiracy to frame Russia. There's no apparent simple, comforting explanation that doesn't involve large conspiracies.
How is that a conspiracy theory?
> You'd think there are enough interested parties to make the Russian state an unlikely culprit even if evidence of tampering should be discovered.
How many of those interested parties were actually identified as culprits in widespread hacking of election related systems in the 2016 election?