So we should "just trust" the same people who said that Saddam had WMDs?
No. But these are two very different fact patterns.
In one case it was "we have specific evidence of something that should cause us to go to war".
In this case it is "we can infer that a hostile foreign power will use a straightforward conduit to push propaganda to our populace if we come into conflict".
It's defense, not offense.
It is perfectly reasonable to infer what might happen based on past actions by the specific powers, and on world history. Attempting to gain geopolitical influence through propaganda is nothing new.