I mean, Julie K. Brown wrote like 30? articles about it, talked to 60+ victims, her reporting lead to Epstein's arrest, Acosta's resignation, Maxwell's trial -- I don't think she's "on the take".

https://www.miamiherald.com/topics/jeffrey-epstein

Is it an appeal to authority to trust a primary source who is literally in the courtroom every day, instead of a random anonymous Twitter account just cribbing from primary sources?

I grant you she’s doing a good job, but that does not grant her a monopoly on fact. If only accredited journalists are allowed to report then we have no Wikileaks, no citizen journalism etc. Twitter is in the wrong to suppress an account on account of “artificially” inflating engagement. First, they don’t have to present evidence and second What news organ doesn’t create artificial engagement? It’s a preposterous excuse.

> If only accredited journalists are allowed to report

You are not replying to anyone who has suggested this. Anyway, the government licensing of journalists is at least 5 years off.

US government licensing of journalists would be quickly struck down as unconstitutional. It’s not a free press if you need permission.