RadioWhoWhatWhy Extra: When does an FBI infiltrator become the criminal?
WhoWhatWhy Editor-in-Chief Russ Baker is interviewed by Boston-based syndicated radio host Chuck Morse about the Boston Marathon Bombing trial and the FBI.
WhoWhatWhy Editor-in-Chief Russ Baker is interviewed by Boston-based syndicated radio host Chuck Morse about the Boston Marathon Bombing trial and the FBI.
Convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s lawyers filed a motion last month requesting a new trial, at a different venue. Media superficially covering the filing glossed over an important defense claim: evidence Tsarnaev’s team says shows at least some of the jurors were exposed to “inflammatory” information on their social media feeds.
The federal government won a conviction against a third friend of the Tsarnaev brothers, the accused Boston Marathon bombers. The successful prosecution of Robel Phillipos for making false statements to the FBI demonstrated the agency’s most effective investigative weapon, and showed that cracks in the case are no impediment to a conviction.
NOW LIVE ON WhoWhatWhy Here’s What the Boston Bombing Trial Judge Thinks a Good Juror Looks Like by Andy Thibault Once again, the judge in the Boston Marathon Bombing trial is insisting that there will be no problem seating an impartial jury in the city traumatized by the attack. His latest motion denying the defense’s […]
The killing and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside a Saudi consulate has brought unwanted attention to the oil-rich kingdom. It’s perhaps a good time to remind the public of the often ignored Saudi royal family connections to 9/11.
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.
Does your local police department really need an armored vehicle capable of surviving explosive devices like those buried in the roads of Afghanistan or Iraq? A Republican legislator in New Hampshire, troubled by the increasingly militarized police force in his town, is trying to do something about it.
WhoWhatWhy first brought you the story of the disturbing trend of police departments arming themselves with surplus weapons from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq to patrol Main Street, U.S.A. Others are finally picking up on this explosion of police firepower.
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.