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.
-
-
-
-
Replying to @Voidoided
Well, WL's first comment was that these might be fake, and it has done some very visible vetting since then.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
And its second went in hard against Macron, saying he couldn't know they were fake and they were ahead (I wonder how?). Backpedalling after.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Voidoided
And guess what? In retrospect, that proved smart, bc we have been reminded that Macron said he'd seed fakes.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel @Voidoided
Incidentally, something very similar happened w/US attempts to discredit WL, bc Dem sources elevated a fake of a doc WL subsequently dumped.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
And (2) was their bias showing. It was not about whether they were ahead of Macron/ANSSI -they were trying to validate while not doing so.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Voidoided
Which is why this could be counterproductive. Bc WL's bias (I think you overestimate its justification) proved correct.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
They either had them before and distanced themselves, or didn't, and didn't have a platform from which to speculate about who was 'ahead'.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I'd add that Macron's sharply different claims last week and this week abt whether they've been hacked is not good for credibility either.
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.