Who's Really Behind That Screen Name?

I have been hearing a lot this week about the various people on the internet who have been slinging attacks at the presidential candidates and how the campaigns are secretly behind the smears (well, to be fair, I am using the plural here, but really, the accusations of secret smearing are only going in one direction at present.) I wonder why no one has thought to suggest that some of those people may, in fact, be operatives and supporters of the campaign being smeared, that this is all just a way of trying to make themselves look like the victims of vicious lies. Because, honestly people, it isn't that hard to establish an anonymous internet presence and appear to be something you are not. We hear all the time about pedophiles posing as teenagers in order to ensnare kids and police officers pretending to be underage in order to capture predators. So why do people assume that someone who says something negative about a candidate is an operative of their opponent's campaign? I'm not suggesting that supporters didn't taken the ball and run with it, but how do we know that the first pieces of raw meat that were thrown out there didn't come from the very people now claiming to be the victims of vicious rumors? Why aren't any members of the media suggesting that this could have been started by trolls? Don't tell me that CNN hasn't heard of trolls. My mother knows about trolls.

And, since the accusations have only been going in one direction lately, how come the campaigns are not held to the same standards? Why is one campaign held responsible for everything said on the internet, whereas the other campaign has never had to answer for any of the various anonymous emails that keep floating around?