woah, hold up. this daily mail article isn't some smoking gun proving the opposition did it. it's about a leaked phone call, remember? like, yeah, the estonian foreign ministry said the call was real. okay. but that's just saying the call happened, not that everything in the call is fact. and get this - the estonian guy in the call, paet, is just repeating what a doctor told him! it's like, hearsay, second-hand info. not exactly rock-solid proof. this 'dr. olga' chick's opinion, relayed through a phone leak, is suddenly 'proof'? plus, the article even says estonia denied blaming the opposition! so, even estonia isn't jumping on this as proof of opposition guilt. they're basically saying 'yeah, the call happened, but chill, we're not saying the opposition did it based on this.' daily mail, come on. it's not exactly known for super-serious, unbiased reporting, right? they love a sensational headline. this article adds to the conversation, maybe. but 'proof'? nah. it's one piece of a way bigger, way messier puzzle, and it's based on a leak and hearsay, not some like, official investigation or anything.
Finland