It is hard to imagine that a legit team of whistleblowers would use Thomas Drake's name and likeness to sell access to their site. (Some folks tried to sign up and complained about getting asked to pay $7 plus $1 per month just to see the website.)
> slick sites are popping up disguised as pro-POTUS sites but are fundamentally using lies to prop up their credibility.
>Why do they need to do that?
>What do they hope to trick people into doing?
>Subterfuge indicates nefarious goals.
I might be willing to forgive some kinds of subterfuge under some circumstances. However, there is no reason to believe that these alleged whistleblowers are really trying to do the right thing.