Cogent alternate narrative/argument against high-profile leaks

Fenestella

Banned
Provided that -
1) given enough personnel (committed and competent) & enough time, any document & any amount of documents can be forged;
2) the authenticity/inauthenticity of the document(s) is determined by "experts";
3) when the contention is highly politicized, both sides will have enough "experts" working and speaking in their behalves -

whenever X (any powerful individual or organization) is implicated by leaks, X and X's mouthpiece must stick to the counter-narrative about hostile actors / foreign powers having innumerable experts and professionals working full-time on the forgery of the so-called "leaked" documents.

X must never try to silence the whistle-blower(s). If necessary, X and X's mouthpiece should discredit the whistle-blowers (e.g., expose/fabricate the whistleblowers' records, connections, and so on).
 
X must never try to silence the whistle-blower(s). If necessary, X and X's mouthpiece should discredit the whistle-blowers (e.g., expose/fabricate the whistleblowers' records, connections, and so on).

Or get Y, Z, or A to silence the whistleblower, after they've been discredited.

Or persuade the whistleblower to silence themselves after discrediting themselves.

Or destroy the credibility of the whistleblower by co-opting them and turning them.

Or destroy the credibility of the whistleblower by getting them to recant.

Or divert attention to make the leak ignored.

Or ...

The list goes on. There are literally dozens of ways of dealing with the situation.
 
Top