Your comment looks like an information operation itself. As far as I can tell, the only claims that the drones "tried to kill Putin" come from Russian state media.
Losing benefit of the doubt doesn't mean you're guilty.
It just means when Russia accused the UK [1] of blowing up the pipeline you can't trust them. Or when Russia accuses the US [2] of blowing up the pipeline you can't trust them. It doesn't mean the US or UK didn't do it; it just means Russian claims are not evidence and you'd probably be better off just completely ignoring them so that it doesn't taint any opinions.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-british-nav...
[2]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-09/russia-bl...
Anyways I'm hardly savvy enough to know who did what and what was faked through the fog of war and all the war propaganda, but "If the Russians say down, they are disreputable invaders, so we must say up" is not a very good mode of analysis for teasing out the truth.
They might be doing this. I'd be tempted, if I were Putin. But it's pretty clear that 90%+ of all claims that Russia is doing this turn out to be malevolent information operations by our own side.
Example: Hamilton 68, supposedly a website that tracked Russian "information operations" on Twitter. Except it turned out to be pure, unadulterated garbage from a US think tank that was labelling Americans who worked night shifts as Russians. That didn't stop the media reporting it as "russian disinfo" for years, and when the truth finally came out, refusing to report on their own failed reporting and complicity.
There's tons of stuff like that. If a western source is making a claim about Russian misinformation, it's pretty much a dead cert thing that they're making it up.
> As far as I can tell, the only claims that the drones "tried to kill Putin" come from Russian state media.
Well, I was reporting what the news said, and it was definitely not the Russian media.