No. You got the last part wrong. > how someone other than the most obvious culprit hacked the DNC. All Adam investgates is Guccifer2.0. Nothing about GRU and FSB hack of DNC servers. Nothing about Seth Rich. Nothing about source of Wikileaks.
"it seems very likely." So you don't know that and yet buy into "Adam's" little conspiracies. Why?
-
-
You are in denial that G2 advertising his presence (in some form) at that event the day before makes connection more likely causative than coincidental.
-
I'm not in denial of anything. I'm just glad you've finally admitted that you have no idea what the provenance of that file is and are just assuming that it's "causative." My golly, you've just undermined your project even more than
@dcampbell_iptv did. -
Tweet unavailable
-
Thanks "Adam." I'm perfectly happy to have people see you respond to me pointing out the flaw in your entire website as "petulance." Badge of honor.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Because official narrative based on evidence presented by intelligence agencies seems way less likely to be true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.