> This is the worst case of a classic blackmail operation against Jensen and it is highly co-ordinated with major news outlets like the NYT, WSJ, The Economist and FT.

Jensen was already being blackmailed by the Trump administration for the past year, which Trump all but admits openly here:

https://youtu.be/m2aC8lAOQbg?si=rqqSliGdLF4_Q663&t=1460

@24:20 if the link doesn't maintain the timestamp on your platform.

He doesn't name Jensen, but in hindsight with everything that has come out (including information on the timing of the Rubio memo) he is obviously talking about him and threatening him with jail to become a yes-man, and Jensen complied.

So IMO the real question isn't who was blackmailing Jensen (we know that), the question is: when he was already complying with blackmail for a year, who decided to burn him as an asset? Did it come from the people who were blackmailing him, or an external source? And who gains/loses by the loss of leverage they already had on him?