So here let’s take an example, let’s say I tell you that there was a swan on the grass.
I give a link, the link describes a mystery object that everyone who saw says was white.
You read the link and say, “Doesn’t describe a swan. False news!” And you ignore and forget the story.
I give a second link. The link describes a thing with feathers.
You read the link and say, “Doesn’t describe a swan. False news!” And you ignore and forget the story.
I give a third link. The links says that one of the witnesses was reminded of a Danish fairy tale.
You read the link and say, “Doesn’t describe a swan. False news!” And you ignore and forget the story.
I give a fourth link. The link says the object moved from the grass to the water, and floated.
You read the link and say, “Doesn’t describe a swan. False news!” And you ignore and forget the story.
I give a fifth link. The link says that the object had a long neck and a small head.
You read the link and say, “Doesn’t describe a swan. False news!” And you ignore and forget the story.
Again, a smoking gun is not how evidence works in crime, historical investigation, counter-intelligence, or scientific investigation. It’s a compilation of small hints. If you demand each one to be a smoking gun, then you’ll never get anywhere. You have to put it all together and decide what hypotheses fit all of the facts.
In the case of WikiLeaks, the alternative hypothesis would be that there are accusations of a Russian connection, and thus there is journalistic data about connections to Russia, because the connections are not none. If you asked them to investigate the connections to Venezuela, they might produce an equal amount of material.
That hypothesis would fit a large number of the facts, for example, Assange looking for asylum in Russia in 2010 and 2017. But it doesn’t explain WikiLeaks rejecting good information about Russia, why they steered and arranged Snowden’s trip to Russia, Assange’s bonus knowledge/interest in Russia, Snowden working for RT, WikiLeaks echoing Russian propaganda, or Pompeo supporting the WikiLeaks/Russia connection despite that being bad for his administration.