3 ms·

i find it very hard to believe that Krebs would just randomly blame some person without credible evidence. just as i stated in my response to @invokestatic: "t

i find it very hard to believe that Krebs would just randomly blame some person without credible evidence. just as i stated in my response to @invokestatic: "this isn't some dude on twitter that no one listens to making a false statement, this is a credible and world renown journalist making a false statement." Krebs would have a lot to lose if he didn't do his research and made stuff up for the sake of a story. i'm sorry but i personally think this is just a poor attempt at discrediting him.

zucker42 6y ago
> i find it very hard to believe that Krebs would just randomly blame some person without credible evidence I do not find this hard to believe. He could have simply made a mistake. He could have evidently credible evidence which ends up being flawed. This defense of Krebs is baffling to me, because it doesn't even defend his actions on their merits and his claims on the evidence he provided. The argument in Krebs's favor is that you trust Krebs, which is a fine enough point but unlikely to convince people who don't trust Krebs. Even if he is right about this person, publicly revealing them instead of just contacting the police seems like a highly questionable decision to me.