The information presented is limited, correct. It is, however, more than enough for any reasonable person to conclude 1) it is about Bernie 2) WVA refers to West Virginia 3) It's talking about state primaries 4) they hope to harm his chances.

Everything about Bayes theorem etc and probabilities of various other explanations are disingenuous. Consider what Brad Marshall said when asked for comment:

> “I do not recall this. I can say it would not have been Sanders. It would probably be about a surrogate.”

(emphasis mine). https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new-leak-top-dnc-officia...

Usually when people deny remembering having sent an e-mail that was clearly delivered it's evidence that they're lying.

Your particular approach to engaging on what we don't necessarily know rather than what occurred prima facie makes me think that if you saw a nuclear explosion, you'd point out we don't know whether mushrooms do indeed grow that fast or not.