I omitted the word “conclusive” that was included in the Washington Post headline. Why? Because it’s weasel wording included to cast doubt. You see if there is no “conclusive” evidence than you have to consider their may be circumstantial evidence. Which is a red herring. – The red herring fallacy specifically involves using that irrelevant claim to redirect the discussion and avoid discussion/debate about the original topic.

No Evidence that Russia is Behind Nord Stream Sabotage Attack

Related:

No conclusive evidence Russia is behind Nord Stream attack