For instance the article suggests Jack Smith violated a law and provides a hyperlink which leads back to the article rather than to the actual statute he violated or a discussion of how he violated the law. This is unpardonable. And then you go on and get to a link in the middle of the text that is spam advertising. Now I get it he needs advertising revenue, but he controls where on the page the advert appears and he should make sure that it is offset in a text box so that the reader is not confused about whether it is part of the text he is trying - often bootlessly when JH is the author - to understand or some other distraction besides the distractions contained in JH’s own bad writing.
PS And another thing - there are already statutes making it illegal to falsify or tamper with evidence without resorting to the likely unconstitutional Enron/J6 law.