Tampa Bay Times, on a story "Published 6 hours ago|Updated 1 hour ago," the substance of which is in general making rounds on the web:
TAMPA — An FBI search earlier this month at the home of
media consultant Tim Burke and his wife, Tampa City Council member Lynn
Hurtak, stemmed from an investigation of alleged computer intrusions and
intercepted communications at the Fox News Network, the Tampa Bay Times
has learned.
The Times obtained a letter Thursday that a
Tampa federal prosecutor sent to Fox News, which describes an ongoing
criminal probe into computer hacks at the company, including unaired
video from Tucker Carlson’s show. The former primetime host was dropped
by the network in April.
The letter does not mention
Burke, but the Times confirmed with two people close to the
investigation that the matter relates to the May 8 search at his
Seminole Heights home.
The
Times contacted Burke on Thursday evening and read him parts of the
letter. Burke said that he would have to ask his lawyer if he could make
a statement in response. Friday morning, he said he couldn’t comment.
Hurtak previously said in a statement that the search appeared to be
solely related to her husband’s work as a journalist.
Assistant
U.S. Attorney Jay Trezevant wrote the letter asking that Fox News
preserve information and records related to the investigation for a
period of at least 90 days. The government views the network “as one of
the potential victim-witnesses” of the alleged criminal conduct,
Trezevant wrote.
The investigation, according to the
letter, concerns allegations of unauthorized computer access;
interception of wire, oral or electronic communication; conspiracy; and
other federal crimes. [...]
Omitting how the item explains the federal search event ties into publication in two outlets of matters related to Tucker Carlson, where FOX asserts wrongful disclosure of its proprietary materials, the conclusion of the TBTimes item raises a consideration:
To get a search warrant, investigators typically submit an
affidavit to a judge describing their investigation and why they believe
a search of a particular piece of property will turn up evidence of a
crime.
When a judge authorizes a search warrant, it does not necessarily mean that a criminal charge is forthcoming.
The
warrant and other documents related to the search of Hurtak and Burke’s
home have not been made public. The Times filed a court paper May 12 to
argue for their release.
Trezevant said the government
had no objection to unsealing most of the documents, except for the
probable cause affidavit. [...]
In
a written request filed with the U.S. District Court on Thursday to
keep the affidavit sealed, the prosecutor described the document as
“lengthy and detailed.” It contains information about people who could
become subjects of the investigation, references to potential witnesses
and victims, and other details that, if made public, “could be used to
undermine and hobble the United States’ legitimate significant
investigative efforts.”
The prosecutor also noted that
events described in the affidavit showcase an investigation that “may,
if properly safeguarded, extend well-beyond the specific facts and
events described therein.”
The document remains the subject of ongoing litigation.
[italics added] Crabgrass is unaware whether that "... investigation that may,
if properly safeguarded, extend well-beyond the specific facts and
events described" in the warrant affidavit language is boilerplate for any [perhaps all] instances DOJ wants to keep an affidavit of probable cause secret, or whether there is a real and major consideration of this particular investigation lifting rocks where the life uncovered is well-beyond what the lifting was expected to show.
If it goes beyond Tucker - FOX severing a business relation, and an ordinary leak, to some far-reaching hacking activity, it will be a story that grows legs, as well as publicizing FOX, Carlson, and the seguing Musk controlled Twitter's reach.
Is it smoke without a fire, or will an extensive blaze be uncovered?