This is pure and simply click bait, headline info with no content on purpose.
So you admit you didn't go to the link and see what was there, but you KNOW it had no content.
Do you not see the problem there ?
As has been mentioned, Conservative Treehouse had much the same story (and both were quite lengthy, containing a BUNCH OF CONTENT), yet you are not complaining about other sources like Conservative Treehouse ?
Admittedly this was a 'copycat' source, but most of the media (and especially the MSM) are 'copycat' sources.
Now, if you want to claim that the OP purposely only provided a brief excerpt when he could have provided the whole article (which , again, was VERY LENGTHY, contained several photos and video, which people would complain about how it clogged up FR's bandwidth), then that is another matter.
Summed up. Not stopped for broken taillight, cop stopped because suspect matched burglary suspects, and cop provided first aid, counter to the narrative.
Now it is not a bad site, the content is good, and photos along with the tweets are informative. But a small summary backing the “EXPLOSIVE EVIDENCE” would have gotten my click.