Ok, so what does that mean?<p>MU had large numbers of people who used it legitimately and illegitimately. Did those large numbers of DOJ/Senators belong to the former or latter camp? From the article itself, while not conclusive, seems to hint that those might have been legitimate users (MU's justification for existing). The reason for their takedown was the illegitimate use. I don't see a contradiction. I see irony.<p>It seems more like a "gotcha"/linkbait headline than incriminating, as the "oh, snap" might suggest.