The piece is entertaining in the way it picks apart the grotesque lies of the New York Times, but what I found particularly impressive is that its anonymous author is exceptionally well versed in Russiagate and understands two crucial facts that almost everyone else misses. First, leaving aside the fact that the broader Russia collusion narrative was manufactured by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the entire FBI predicate ultimately rested on one articulable factual claim, the alleged Papadopoulos information. And even that amounted to nothing more than a suggestion of a suggestion that Russia might possess information damaging to Hillary Clinton. Second, and this is where almost everyone gets it wrong, the author understands that the claim that this suggestion of a suggestion came from Joseph Mifsud, rather than from something Papadopoulos had heard on Fox News or elsewhere, rests on Papadopoulos’s own later account, given under extreme FBI pressure from agents desperate to get him to say what they needed him to say. That fact is almost always overlooked. So, well done to the anonymous author. Well worth the read.