>Another poorly conceived and written article with no mention of the nature of the evidence.
It is hard to report on something you are never going to be allowed to see for yourself.
A certain sense of what the nature of the evidence might be can be gleaned from public documents such as the search warrants (scouting guy was only one of three people involved in this case so) there were three warrants. Searching this stuff out used to be called investigative reporting and once upon a time it was common.
Why is it that I can find out more in fifteen minutes on the internet than someone paid to write professionally uncovers?
The legacy press isn’t flagging only because of political bias. It’s also lazy and incompetent.