Sure, as I said in my post I agree the rest is up for debate, and again I'm not supporting the raid. But the specific claim about the document being a public re

Sure, as I said in my post I agree the rest is up for debate, and again I'm not supporting the raid. But the specific claim about the document being a public record seems prima facie false, and nothing you mentioning here is supporting that claim. I do appreciate the deeper analysis on why the warrant doesn't hold up. It doesn't seem to me that you need to make any claim about the document being public in order to make it clear that the warrant was dubious; I think you could just retract that specific claim and then your argument would be on very strong ground.