Even though Levi was on the correct side of the story regarding the Serving of the warrant, there is still the question as to HOW it was reported.

This so called “breaking” event was sourced as coming from LAW ENFORCEMENT. The last time I checked, a clerk of the court is NOT law enforcement.

law enforcement

I mentioned Dan Rather in my original article for a reason. It has to do with ACCURATELY reporting the SOURCE of certain documents as well as if they were AUTHENTIC.


Implying that law enforcement confirmed the warrant rather  then the more likely source being a public record available to all who know how to find it, is a journalistic slight of hand that is frowned upon in the media circles. It seems to me that Levi wanted to imply that he had an inside track in law enforcement that gave him this information rather than the actual source being from THE PUBLIC RECORD. 


I know of one other source, not law enforcement, where more likely Levi received this information other than simply checking the public record which published into the public record,  the info the very day the warrant was granted. 

Some might criticize me for a bit of nit picking, but you must understand something.

Levi is more or less a mainstream journalist rather than a mere blogger and thus the journalistic standards his followers expect from him is more than just would be expected from a “mere blogger.”

It would have been better for him not only to be more precise in how he obtained the information but also to have supplied the link to the court records which had already been made public.

Stay tuned