It’s been five years since the Boston Marathon bombing. Nevertheless, the federal government continues to withhold most of its official records about the primary perpetrator of that heinous attack.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev told agents that four mystery men claiming to be FBI agents tried to contact him, according to a recently released 2011 FBI interview summary. Were those men really from the FBI or another federal agency? A growing body of evidence says a government connection is likely.
Last month, we reported startling new evidence that answered the questions, What did the FBI know about accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev — and when did it know it? Now the public is asking the same questions about Omar Mateen. For an in-depth look at how the FBI interacts with prospective informants, please see the story below. Published two years ago, it is still highly relevant.
FBI documents reveal that Ibragim Todashev was involved in a 2012 FBI investigation that parallels the Bureau’s investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. What was the true nature of the FBI’s relationship with Tsarnaev and his dead friend?
In the rush to pin the blame on the Tsarnaev brothers for virtually every crime in Boston around the time of the marathon bombing, is it possible that law enforcement has left the real killer on the loose?
We know Huffington Post loves celebrities and buzz. But its new National Security Fellow really pushes the boundaries of incredulity.
A poll in Boston turned up a surprising finding—42 percent of those polled are unsure if Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzohkhar Tsarnaev is guilty. That’s a shock given the dominant media narrative that says he’s guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet the case is still full of lots of contradictions and unanswered questions that beg for answers.
WhoWhatWhy’s Russ Baker joins Guillermo Jimenez of Traces of Reality Radio to analyze the killing of Ibragim Todashev by FBI Agent Aaron McFarlane and other strange elements of the official story about the Boston Marathon Bombing.
The FBI agent who fatally shot a friend of one of the accused Boston marathon bombers has a record tarnished by accusations of police brutality and misleading statements. It’s just another bombing-related secret the federal government doesn’t want the public to know.
Is accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s right to a fair trial being eroded by the litany of leaks around the case? WhoWhatWhy takes a look.
A quick look back at some of the groundbreaking reporting WhoWhatWhy has done on the Boston bombing case—why we’ve done it, and why we believe it matters.
From the start, we’ve seen evidence that the US government, aided and abetted by the media, has been hiding something about what it knows regarding the Boston Marathon bombing. Now, a calculated leak seeks to pin the blame on Russia and to exonerate the FBI. What does this latest distraction hide? A lot, it seems.
TV journalist Emily Rooney recently interviewed WhoWhatWhy’s Russ Baker about “Danny,” the mysterious carjacking victim in the Boston Marathon case. A point-by-point breakdown of big discrepancies Baker uncovered during an exclusive investigation of Danny’s story.
Recently, we published evidence of disturbing contradictions in the public accounts of the man who put the guilty stamp on the Tsarnaev brothers in the Boston bombing case. In this second part of a series, we take an in-depth look at that man, the mystery witness. We examine his crucial but little understood role in rapidly ending the investigation of the bombing. Meet “Danny,” the “magic bullet” of the Boston bombing story.
The only witness to the Boston Marathon bombing confession has provided dramatically inconsistent accounts, an exclusive WhoWhatWhy investigation reveals. The clashing stories, coming from a man whose identity remains shrouded, form the basis for the publicly accepted narrative of the bombing and its aftermath.
The discrepancies involve the nature and length of the carjacking episode, and raise serious questions as to whether the anonymous witness was ever a captive of the alleged bombers. This in turn touches on the credibility of his claim to have received a confession from Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
In fact, the problems with this witness’s story cast doubts on almost everything we have been told about what has been described as the largest terrorist attack on American soil since 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.
The federal government’s grip on information about the Boston Marathon Bombing investigation and prosecution gets ever more vise-like. A federal judge has rejected the ACLU’s attempt to file a friend of the court brief raising serious constitutional questions about the government’s proceedings against the accused bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. And his defense attorneys have charged that the government continues to withhold investigatory details that Tsarnaev needs to get a fair trial. A civil liberties attorney tells WhoWhatWhy that the judge is acting like “a tool of the U.S. Department of Justice.”
Another member of Congress questions the FBI’s candor on the Boston bombing. And he hints at something deeply problematical going on. Read his letter to the Bureau.
Are you a kooky meddler if you question the gauzy law enforcement narrative about the labyrinthine Boston Marathon bombing investigation? Or is it crazier to place blind trust in the infallibility of the FBI? We’ll take the first option. Here are a few of the many basic issues that have still not been resolved.
For weeks, we’ve been reporting about aspects of the Boston Marathon bombing where the official story just doesn’t add up. But what if these inconsistencies point to something amiss on a far deeper level? What if the FBI’s initial claim that it didn’t know who the Tsarnaev brothers were—when in fact it knew about them for several years—hides an even bigger embarrassment?