... and? They were private citizens and the records were relevant to the case. The only reason they've got their panties in a knot over this is because they're trying to cover things up which is exactly why the investigation was happening in the first place. As long as the FBI had a warrant for those records they seized this is a non-story, just an intelligence agency literally doing their job exactly as they're supposed to.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
44 points (92.3% liked)
News
37132 readers
1541 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a story because the FBI just fired the agents involved in that investigation, per the article. Patel literally firing people for investigating him.
Sure, but that's not the way the story is framed. The framing makes it seem like the FBI having the records is the story rather than the FBI firing agents for doing their jobs. The headline is just terrible and is blatantly biased to try to make the agents actions seem nefarious. To be clear I wasn't criticizing the posting of this story or trying to suggest that the poster shouldn't have submitted it, it's more a criticism of reuters and the way they've chosen to approach this story. It would have been nice to see an article posted about this that focused more on the blatantly corrupt firing of the agents rather than dedicating most of the story to discussing the seizing of the records and getting sound bites from politicians.
What you're referring to is passive voice. It often reframes things to benefit those in power.
https://reviewofjournalism.ca/the-not-so-subtle-price-of-writing-in-the-passive-voice/
That's how you can be certain he's innocent would a guilty person bring attention to themselves like that?