Is this what you are talking about?
----------
On Friday, Breitbart, the
far-right news site, was neck-and-neck
with the Wall Street Journal on a huge scoop
when they released details about the search warrant that was issued for
Mar-a-Lago — former President Donald Trump's Florida estate — earlier this week.
But Breitbart completely butchered their scoop.
Rather than focusing on the specific details of the warrant, or the itemized list of property that federal agents seized from Trump's home on suspicion of potentially serious crimes (the outlet obtained both documents and
only laterpublished them in full), author Matthew Boyle initially chose to write about when the warrant was issued. Specifically, Boyle reported that the warrant was signed by a federal judge three days before the FBI raided Trump's home.
Why does that matter? It doesn't, really, unless you're Breitbart:
"Why the authorities waited several days to execute service of the warrant if the matter rose to such a serious national security issue is unclear," Boyle wrote. "If what federal agents intended to obtain from the raid was such a risk to national security, the fact they decided to linger and wait for several days before executing is likely to become a major point of contention as this debate plays out in front of the public."
Yep, that's right. The possibility that Trump left office in possession of documents that could present a threat to national security got less attention from Breitbart — the first publication to get the genuinely newsworthy scoop — than the fact that it took federal authorities three days to raid Trump's home after a search warrant was signed.
As expected, the outlet was
roundly criticized online for its editorial choices. That led to Boyle amending the original piece to include several long-winded updates, including more specifics about the documents the outlet obtained. However, those additional updates only provided more fodder for criticism.
For example, an update at 2:25 p.m. ET reads: "Attachment B to the warrant delineates the three statutes which agents are pursuing evidence under. They are: 18 USC 793, 2071, and 1519."
What Boyle initially failed to mention in that update is that
18 U.S. Code 793 is a statute that's part of the Espionage Act. That specific law makes it a crime to remove or misuse information related to national defense, a serious offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Federal agents had enough reason to believe Trump violated the Espionage Act that they raided his home to search for evidence, but Boyle at first floated it as a passing detail.
Boyle later outlined each of the three federal statutes (18 USC sections 793,
2071 and
1519) that federal authorities believe Trump potentially violated in an update at 2:37 p.m., but again downplayed their seriousness. With relation to to section 793, the Breitbart site now reads: "The first statute is the one that has likely provoked media speculation about so-called 'nuclear' documents: it applies to a broad range of defense 'information,' from code books to ordinary photographs."
Then, in an update posted six minutes later: "All of this is technically irrelevant anyway because Trump —who as president has original and absolute declassification authority — said he declassified all of these documents."
As the afternoon wore on, other publications obtained the same documents and reported them in far greater detail, essentially squashing Breitbart's big get. And as of early evening Eastern Time on Friday, Breitbart appears to have finally ceased with the incessant, piecemeal updates.
Breitbart published a copy of the search warrant issued to Donald Trump before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago. True to form, they butchered it.
www.sfgate.com
www.theapeinvestors.com
Epstein's defense lawyers included Roy Black, Gerald Lefcourt, Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, and former U.S. Solicitor General Ken Starr.
