They released literally nothing on trump, and the idea of them having nothing on him is laughable
So speculation, next?
What they released on hillary, despite it being almost irrelevant, was released in a manner that achieved the maximum possible negative impact for hillary. They release that information slowly over time, dripping it out onto the public solely so they could keep the negative connotation of Hillary and Emails in the news as much as possible.
Making sure the MSM doesnt sweep massive corruption under the rug in a few day is a bad thing now huh? I bet you weren't saying that when Bush was president and his administrations scandals were swept away in a few days despite having decades long repercussions (WMD's!!!)
And if you are asking for evidence of them selectively releasing information to mislead the public.. that simply isn't going to be provable, sadly.
Dozens and Dozens of leaks without a even a single shred of proof (not even an accusation from a supposed source) that they selectively edited or withheld any information given to them, yet you still think they selectively edited or withheld information. You sound like a conspiracy theorist at this point. Just connecting arbitrary dots to fit a narrative.
Not eveything is so black and white, literally everything is explained simply by saying that only russian-allied forces have given wikileaks info.