Why wouldn't Q just say "assange"?
Plausible deniability in place.
If message was clear to black hats, they know it was Assange.
No reason to be obscure about it if it was JA.
I'm with you Anon.
Q would have just said they had Assange.
Q is still a "larp" = plausible deniability.
Black hats would know what source meant = no need to obfuscate the message.
Am I missing another reason that would require Q not state "we have assange"?