Has Lisa Noelle Voldeng produced original interview tapes or supporting documents to independent journalists or investigators?

1. What Voldeng publicly released and claimed to have done

Voldeng posted six hours of audio attributed to “Sascha Riley” on her Substack and drew attention by publishing detailed write-ups alongside the recordings, an act covered across multiple outlets noting the Substack publication as the distribution point ^{[4] [2] [3]}. In public posts she states she contacted law‑enforcement and government offices and provided audio plus a list of corroborative evidence to obtain, and she has described having passed audio to “allies” and officials including Senator Wyden’s office and others ^[1]. Reporting also places the interviews as phone recordings said to have occurred between July 19–24, 2025, according to the materials Voldeng published ^{[6] [7]}.

2. What independent reporting has verified (and what it hasn’t)

News outlets and verification-focused analyses have repeatedly described the audio as viral and attributed to Voldeng’s Substack release, but they uniformly flag that the allegations and materials remain unverified and that independent corroboration is absent in the public record ^{[6] [4] [5]}. A prominent public commentator who listened to the files called the audio “beyond horrifying” yet emphasized there is “nothing in the way of other evidence in the piece itself—no documents, no emails, etc.”—a judgment echoed in special‑report style verification pieces ^{[8] [4]}. In short, mainstream scrutiny has documented the publication but not the transfer of original, authenticated source files or supporting documents to independent investigators available in reporting ^{[4] [8]}.

3. Claims of handing material to investigators versus evidence in public reporting

Voldeng’s own posts claim contact with police, OSBI, congressional offices and international contacts and say she supplied audio and lists of corroborative evidence to some of those parties, but reporting to date has not produced documentation from independent journalists or law‑enforcement spokespeople confirming receipt of original master tapes or that investigators publicly relied on materials obtained from Voldeng ^{[1] [5]}. Verification work published by others has outlined what would be needed—identity checks, audio authentication, records mapping and corroborating documents—and noted that those steps have not been demonstrably completed in the public domain ^[4].

4. Credibility burdens, competing perspectives, and implicit agendas

The release’s provenance and Voldeng’s profile as a Substack creator rather than a traditional investigative journalist raise what verification analysts call a higher credibility burden: a dossier‑style evidentiary drop requires transparent chain‑of‑custody and corroboration to move from viral allegation to verified reporting ^[4]. Supporters and some commenters argue the audio itself merits attention and that publishing it was a public service; critics and verification outlets caution the lack of accompanying documentation invites both genuine investigative follow‑up and exploitation by partisan actors, creating incentives for amplification without vetting ^{[8] [4]}. Reporting also notes that the materials’ potential political ramifications have fueled intense online circulation even while core facts remain unconfirmed ^[6].

5. Bottom line answer to the central question

Based on available reporting through January 2026, Lisa Noelle Voldeng has publicly published audio she says are interviews with Sascha Riley on her Substack and has asserted she provided audio and lists of corroborative evidence to various officials ^{[2] [3] [1]}. Independent journalists and investigators, in the reporting reviewed, have not produced or shown original, authenticated interview master tapes or supporting documentary evidence directly obtained from Voldeng; verification efforts remain outstanding and the allegations remain unverified in the public record ^{[4] [8] [5]}.