Reply #8: I posted this on another thread in response to a question...

[WiseButAngrySara]

The silence of Pitt, T.O. and Leopold speaks volumes at this point in
time, IMHO. They knew of Leopold's lack of credibility in the past, and they are still standing by his story in spite of their current loss of credibility, as exemplified by Google and Yahoo news, and most recently, being lambasted by Maurie and Connie on MSNBC. Why is this? Why are they still supporting Leopold? It is suicidal, if there were not a great deal of credibility in Leopold's original story. I posted an opinion about a week ago, on the possibility of Leopold being "Hatfielded" and/or "Rathered" by his sources. This is such a Rovean tactic, to spread disinformation through an unreliable news source, so that no one believes the bearer of the news, and the true content of the story is lost and/or forgotten. I could try to repost the original, because it was soon locked, but I found out yesterday that it is against DU policy to 'repost' a locked thread!