Disinfectant might have to be poisoning all the leak-wells so their credibility is shot. Unlikely ever to be able to stop them filling up.
So if they had them before then they failed to serve GRU's (presumed) purpose and that makes them look good.
-
-
In any case, if fake email thing was meant to discredit WL, it failed, in part bc Macron blabbed abt it first, & was too quick in statement
-
Not directly aimed at WL, but at hackers who have other choices of other distrib channels. You must know that 2nd WL tweet was political.
-
They should've just stayed away - why say anything if not their leak and didn't know any more than anyone else (and less than the players)?
-
Bc Assange is a narcissist and the press feeds it? But again, thus far they don't look "bad" (operationally) out of what they did.
-
I think agree to disagree. They inoculated themselves operationally by not being the channel, but still took a political stance.
-
I think I took your point & goal more narrowly. If goal is to discredit, has to be operational. Esp since failed attempt may hurt Macron
-
Goal was surely source not channel (if latter gets blowback, well fine). WL distanced op'rlly but couldn't resist lending a political oar
-
Doesn't theory only work if (as is likely but not proven) that source is same as DNC emails and WL knows that? And only for this source?
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.