Have any major newspapers published investigative pieces that obtained CPS/FBI/military records related to Sascha Riley since January 2025?

1. What the reporting actually shows about record access

The core documents and audio driving the story were released via independent channels — notably a set of long-form audio recordings published on Substack by journalist Lisa Noelle Voldeng and reposted or summarized by outlets and social posts — and the sources describe purported links to police or investigative files but do not present authenticated CPS, FBI, or military files produced by major newspapers ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

2. Mainstream press coverage — what is missing

Multiple fact‑lite summaries in international and regional outlets report the existence of the viral recordings and note the explosive allegations, but those same accounts uniformly state the claims remain unverified and that no courts or law‑enforcement agencies have publicly authenticated the material — a pattern consistent with “zero mainstream coverage” of confirmed official records as reported in the sources ^{[3] [4] [1]}.

3. Claims by the originators and advocates

The Substack pieces and boosters maintain that police records and related documents exist and have been shared with certain officials or made available upon request, and they urge formal investigations; the reporting provided reproduces those claims while clearly flagging that the records themselves were not independently validated by major news organizations in the cited material ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

4. Contradictory signals and unverified assertions in public posts

Social media posts and threads amplify both belief in the testimony and assertions that Riley contacted the FBI or testified to congressional oversight, but those posts are presented in the available coverage as user claims or impressions rather than documentary proof — the mainstream summaries cited emphasize lack of official confirmation of FBI interviews, CPS records, or verified military service files in the public reporting shown ^{[5] [6] [4]}.

5. Why this matters and the limits of available reporting

The distinction between raw, independently released testimony and authenticated institutional records is central: the pieces cited make grave allegations and point to purported documents, yet the provided sources repeatedly caution that until CPS, FBI, or military records are produced, vetted, and reported on by established investigative outlets, the assertions remain allegations; the available corpus does not show a major newspaper publishing an investigation that produced those institutional records ^{[2] [1] [3]}.

6. Alternative explanations and potential agendas

The pattern — viral Substack/audio releases amplified by social posting and secondary international writeups while mainstream investigative outlets remain absent from the record — can reflect a range of dynamics, from genuine whistleblower sourcing that has not yet been corroborated, to strategic circulation on decentralized platforms that outpace verification; the reporting itself flags both the seriousness of the allegations and the institutional silence or lack of documented corroboration, which critics say could indicate insufficient evidence or, alternately, that mainstream outlets have not yet secured access ^{[1] [4] [3]}.

The available reporting therefore supports a clear, narrow conclusion: based on the supplied sources, no major newspaper is shown to have published investigative pieces that obtained CPS, FBI, or military records related to Sascha Riley since January 2025; confirmation would require either publication by a named mainstream outlet citing the records or public release/verification of the records themselves, neither of which appears in the provided material ^{[1] [4] [3]}.