A Nonprofit News Organization
NOW LIVE ON WhoWhatWhy Surveillance and Oppression We Can Believe In by DonkeyHotey and Dan Engelke Sometimes, pictures speak louder than words. With evidence the Obama Administration is the most tight-lipped ever, here’s a picture to complete the story. DonkeyHotey and Dan Engelke show you the score. In Tsarnaev Trial, Prosecutors Turn Hostile Toward Own Witness […]
Only the astonishingly unaccountable FBI could get away with consistently not recording its investigative interviews not only of suspects but of witnesses—then having its agents write up reports based on “memory.” A former Deputy District Attorney tells the story of one judge who felt uncomfortable letting the Bureau wing it when he himself was in the hot seat.
WhoWhatWhy’s Russ Baker on “The Ripple Effect” Podcast. Russ talks about the mysterious crash that killed the investigative journalist Michael Hastings. He also presents his most detailed analysis yet of the Boston Marathon Bombing case. Even after Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was sentenced to death, the questions and doubts about the case are thicker than ever. He explores the out-of-control American Homeland Security State — the screwups, the cover-ups, the recklessness, the hidden agendas; and the cowardice and laziness of the media in failing to pursue the real story. 90 minutes of blunt talk.
The battle for ad dollars and pageviews has become a race to the bottom, in which being first is more important than being correct. Please bear with us as we are once again going against the grain.
Vladimir Putin claims Russian investigators were told that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was “not your business” after they had warned their American counterparts repeatedly.
With a cocktail, a cup of coffee, or a friend, here are ten of our 2017 podcasts worth catching up with — or hearing again.
On May 18, 2015, President Obama made a surprising announcement: he ordered the federal government to reverse its standing practice of providing American police departments with surplus weapons and vehicles from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq. Given declining confidence in police after a seemingly constant recent stream of fatalities involving black suspects, this newfound caution with heavy provisioning is understandable. But questions about the wisdom of militarizing police are not new. WhoWhatWhy first wrote about the issue in February, 2014.
The U.S. District Court judge who presided over the trial of convicted Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev seems to have forgotten crucial details about the jury pool he interviewed during voir dire. Why do I seem to remember more about this aspect of the trial than the presiding judge? When I heard that Judge […]
Several mainstream media reporters in Boston admitted that they don’t see the need to use the word “alleged” when talking about Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The trial is merely a formality, and so are journalistic ethics, apparently. Lara Turner examines the shocking admission.
America’s leading expert on police accountability says the FBI—once regarded as law enforcement’s standard-setter—has become an outlier outfit that ignores “best-practices” police procedures. In an exclusive Q&A with WhoWhatWhy, Samuel Walker says that a key aspect of the Bureau’s probes of shootings by agents is “just crazy.” His comments hold particular relevance considering the FBI’s long-delayed explanation of how and why its agent killed a witness in the Boston Marathon Bombing case.
NOW LIVE ON WhoWhatWhy The Latest from the Boston Bombing Trial: Our News Feed by the WhoWhatWhy Team The first part of jury selection is finished in the trial of accused Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Read on for Editor-in-Chief Russ Baker’s commentary and analysis from his trip to Boston, as well as for courtroom updates from reporter […]
The First Circuit Court of Appeals will hear Boston Marathon Bombing defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s argument that he can’t get a fair trial in Boston. Don’t hold your breath for any revelations though: the appellate court has forbidden lawyers for either side to talk about the details at the heart of the argument.