Anonymous ID: f463a2 Jan. 2, 2019, 2:53 a.m. No.4563046   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3056

>>4563009

Maaaybe?

Am not convinced they're an "us", tho. IF they are an "us" I would think they'd be far more interested in giving the documents to people with the ability to actually act on the potential information.

What this does seem to be is an attempt to muddy the waters for some folks.

Most importantly, how can these docs be verified by those who DO download and read them? (I don't think they CAN be verified as legit, can they?) That's not a great thing - the absence of verification.

Anonymous ID: f463a2 Jan. 2, 2019, 4:19 a.m. No.4563409   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>4563344

Glenn Greenwald had some thoughts about this, as well!

(Short read)

 

https://observer.com/2018/12/glenn-greenwald-on-sucker-journalists-and-why-theres-no-silver-bullet-coming-for-trump/

Anonymous ID: f463a2 Jan. 2, 2019, 4:39 a.m. No.4563490   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3496

>>4563469

Bitcoin's "value" bounces all over the place, so it's not quite "worthless".

I don't know what DS knows, so definitely can't speak to that.

And I'm not following the "guaranteed release" part of your speculation. Help a dumdum out?

Anonymous ID: f463a2 Jan. 2, 2019, 4:55 a.m. No.4563566   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>4563512

Since I'm not psychic (and don't actually care enough to dig on the hackers), I have noooo idea what is motivating this. Maybe intimidation? That seems kind of lame, tho.

My OPINION (emphasis on OPINION) is that it's an attempt to confuse people who are legit seeking the truth and may fall into the "declas now" category of truth seekers.

And I ultimately do not know.

 

Disclaimer: One anon was somewhat emphatically suggesting that it's a great way to get "normies" talking or activated or something, and that is the one opinion I do very strongly disagree with.