When the US decides to leak documents about NK arms sales to Iran or other meaterial, it does so selectively rather than through through a batch dump of a quarter million disconnected documents , and directly to trusted journalists rather than through a suspect third party like wikileaks.
How does catty gossip about foreign leaders and further details of the scope of US diplomatic espionage and Arab regimes' collusion with the US and Israel constitute "disinformation" which advances American foreign policy interests?
I didn't express agreement or disagreement -- just noted the history.
And I won't pretend to know the byzantine ways in which any government reaches its decisions.
Carrol