The Real-Life House of Cards: Insider Deals, Murder & Espionage- The Clintons, Seth Rich & Awans!’

Follow the saga of the Clintons in this unique time line, starting with the race for the White House with all of the major scandals leading up to the present day, including Russia Gate, Seth Rich, the Awan Brothers, and much more - only available at Newsbud.com.

*Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

**Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

Watch Episode Preview

Watch Members Only Full Episode Here

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to see the full video





Featured Video MP3 Audio Clip

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to listen to the audio


Show notes

Russian Government Hackers Penetrated DNC, Stole Opposition Research on Trump

Cyber Firm Behind “Russia Hacking” Claims Has Ties To Soros Supported Think Tank

Wikileaks Reveals “Marble”: Proof CIA Disguises Their Hacks As Russian, Chinese, Arabic…

CrowdStrike Wikipedia

CrowdStrike CEO: No Way to Definitively Prove Russia’s Involvement in DNC Hack

Seth Rich Police Chief Hobnobbed With Clinton Campaign and DNC Officials

John Podesta’s Ex-Sister In Law Is on D.C. Police Foundation Board

Murder of Seth Rich Wikipedia

Kim Dotcom Says He Has Evidence That Seth Rich Was Wikileaks Source

Clinton Ally Gave $500k To Wife of FBI Agent on Email Probe

DC Police: Body Cam Footage From Seth Rich’s Death Won’t Be Released

Wassermann Schultz IT Aide Arrested While Attempting To Flee Country, Charged With Bank Fraud

House Intelligence Foreign Affairs Committee Members Compromised By Rogue IT Staff

Wassermann Schultz Aide In Pakistan Still Liquidating Assets In US

House Den IT Suspects Wanted Untraceable Payments - And Sure Enough, Millions Disappeared

Imran Awan’s Lawyer Is Long Time Clinton Associate

Steve Wasserman

Rod Wheeler Backtracks Statements About Seth Rich Investigation

Behind Fox News’ Baseless Seth Rich Story: The Untold Tale

There Are A Lot Of Holes In The Lawsuit Involving Fox News, Seth Rich, And Donald Trump

BFP Roundtable Video- Exposed: The Timing & Orchestration of Seymour Hersh’s “Bin Laden Kill”

Sibel Edmonds & Pearse Redmond on Hersh’s Bin Laden Kill Exposé, FBI’s Bin Laden Tapes & Much More!

In this BFP Roundtable episode Sibel Edmonds and Pearse Redmond discuss the recent "bombshell" article by Seymour Hersh regarding the so-called Bin laden Raid, offer their analysis of the article itself, and explain why this is yet another attempt to obscure the elephant in the room. The discussion includes two never-before-released revelations regarding the Hersh story and the FBI's Bin Laden tapes: Extrapolating from her sources, Sibel explains why Hersh wrote this article, the timing of it, and the players and agenda behind it. Later she delivers another bombshell that deals with the FBI's infamous Bin Laden tapes: From her time as an FBI translator Sibel was privy to some very interesting information regarding these tapes, how they were used by the Deep State, and how this relates back to the Hersh article.

Watch Preview Here:

Watch Full Video (Members Only) Here:

Listen to the full Audio (Members Only) Here:

SUBSCRIBE

BFP Roundtable Video 5– Our Takes on NATO, Russia, Turkey & the “New Cold War”

In this edition of the BFP Roundtable, Peter B. Collins, Guillermo Jimenez, James Corbett and Sibel Edmonds discuss the latest moves in the formation of a so-called "new cold war" between NATO and Russia. We also tackle Seymour Hersh and his recent article in the London Review of Books examining Turkish involvement in the Syrian chemical weapons attack in Ghouta last year.

Pulitzer Winner Journalist Seymour Hersh on Bin Laden Kill: “It’s One Big LIE, Not One Word of It is True”

Sy Hersh is Adamant that Obama is Worse than Bush

After a long absence, to be exact five years, since President Obama took office, Seymour Hersh is back, out, and talking. And by that I mean really talking. He is calling the reports on Bin Laden’s so-called assassination, by that I mean the mainstream media reports, those dictated by Obama’s White House and Pentagon, big lies,  pure bullshit, and not a single word of it true.

Not only that, he is also providing us with our long-sought answer to his long-gone absence- since the election of Barack Obama. [Read more...]

Are you longing for Seymour Hersh Coverage? Well, One Way to Bring Him Back…

Selective Coverage, Cyclical Reporting & Conditional Journalism


hershA few months ago I wrote a brief commentary questioning the long-absence of Super-Journalist Seymour Hersh despite the continuation and expansion of our wars, scandals involving the Pentagon, ongoing simultaneous black ops and covert wars, and the numerous violations of human rights laws internationally and domestically. I began by comparing Mr. Hersh’s record in authoring articles during the previous administration to those written under the present administration. I checked Hersh-New Yorker coverage of the Bush administration abuses during its first three years:

13 articles. Thirteen hard-hitting well-written, thoroughly investigated, and unabashedly presented articles. Thirteen articles on abuses involving war(s), military, ‘generals’ games, prison and torture … You want to check it for yourself:Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

Then, I searched for Hersh’s article written during the current administration:

3 articles. Three articles. Only three articles since Mr. Obama’s presidential victory. That’s it. None of them on the scandals, issues and abuses of the Obama administration. None of them on Obama’s drone-mania. None of them on bombing and killing civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of them on the dubious brief assault in Yemen. None of them on Bagram torture-abuse-secret imprisonment. None of them on Libya. None of them on jailing Manning-DOD whistleblower or bringing criminal charges against other government whistleblowers. Instead of listing the long list of ‘Nones,’ I’ll give you the only three articles written by Hersh at the New Yorker:

Syria Calling: The Obama Administration’s Chance to Engage in a Middle East Peace- Published in April 2009.

Defending the Arsenal: In an Unstable Pakistan, can Nuclear Warheads be Kept Safe? – Published in November 2009.

The Online Threat: Should we be Worry about a Cyber War? - Published in November 2010.

You’d think the Obama administration’s incredible expansion of US covert wars would be right up Hersh’s alley, no?  How about the current covert war in Yemen with the silent mainstream? Do I need to mention the latest reports on US Drone-Bombing of Somalia?! Or maybe our latest shenanigans and inside-out/outside-in Pakistan relations and our nonstop drone attacks over there? I am sure you can come up with dozens of macro cases and scandals involving the current administration, the Pentagon and the CIA that ordinarily would be Hersh’s reporting territory. No? [Read more...]

The Left’s Hypocrisy? Dialing Seymour Hersh

If Obama Does ‘It’ … Well, We Simply  Won’t Cover It!

NYIt is not easy to criticize a solid professional journalist. It is much harder to criticize a Pulitzer Prize Winning and well-respected investigative journalist. And, it is extremely hard to criticize a professional multi award winning investigative journalist, who happens to be a friend I respect and like. I rather think of the following observation as raising the question (publicly, that is) rather than an accusatory criticism. This is not due to timidity or the fear of being royally attacked (which I know I will be), nor is it because of letting personal friendship determine the color and the tone of my commentary. I think when you read the following, objectively consider and weigh the hard evidence and undisputable track record presented, and pause enough to critically think about the ramifications and possible conclusions, you’ll agree: Raising the question versus pointing an accusatory finger.

It all started with an article I was reading at AntiWar.Com by Justin Raimondo. In his to-the-point and well-articulated commentary piece Raimondo criticizes the blinded partisanship of the Obama cult when it comes to their reaction and response- whether the pretense of naivety or out-right groundless defense of Obama’s ‘Libya War’:

Now that President Barack Obama has intervened in Libya, his army of apologists is mobilizing to defend his “humanitarianism,” declaring that his war isn’t at all like Bush’s wars. It’s something new, and different – and admirable.I’m not at all surprised. Are you? The anti-interventionist veneer of most American liberals and assorted “progressives” peels off quite readily when a little “humanitarian” lotion is applied – especially if it’s poured on thick by a liberal Democratic President with a domestic agenda they can endorse.

Yes, and you’ll note the Obama-ites went to the Council, not the Congress, to ask permission to strike: and just to show we’re not the Top Dog, they let the Brits and the Frenchies take the lead. What generosity.

The “argument” presented here is the one progressives have salved their perpetually guilty consciences with ever since this manifestly unqualified ex-“community organizer” took up residence in the White House: he’s not Bush! That’s why they remained silent when he extended our perpetual “war on terrorism” into Pakistan, why they kept mum as the PATRIOT Act was reauthorized at the behest of the administration, and why they put the covers over their heads and stuck their fingers in their ears as George Bush’s torture regime continued, unabated and even expanded, under Obama. It’s why they ignored our failure to withdraw from Iraq, as promised by candidate Obama, and why they smiled politely and changed the subject whenever anyone had the poor taste to mention these unpleasant subjects.

Corn supplements the Not Bush argument with a new variation, an ideological rationale for knee-jerk defenders of the Obama regime: the we’re-not-neocons meme. Obama’s war in Libya is an example of what Corn actually dubs “the Anti-Bush Doctrine,” which is “precisely the opposite of how the neocons of the Bush-Cheney crowd viewed the world.”

Back in the 1990s, the neocons lent their names to innumerable “open letters” urging Bill Clinton to strike at the Serbs, with prominent progressives such as Susan Sontag leading the charge. George Soros financed a “grassroots” pro-war campaign, and the neocons were more than happy to jump on board the bandwagon – just as they are today.

Pushed into war by a coven of relentlessly nagging neo-liberal Amazons, and a cabal of round-shouldered flabby-faced neocons, President Obama has been captured by ideologues just as surely as was his predecessor – and, I’ll predict right here and now, with equally disastrous results.

The article got me thinking: The previous hawkish administration with its Iraq-Afghanistan wars, PATRIOT ACT, Guantanamo, Kidnap & Torture, Assassins, NSA Illegal Wiretapping of All Americans …

It got me thinking about the present Obama administration: Iraq-Occupation, Afghanistan-Pakistan Wars, Bombing Yemen, Libya War, Extension & Reauthorization of the PATRIOT ACT, Jailing & Torture of Government Whistleblowers, Guantanamo, Bagram Prison Torture & Fiasco, NSA Illegal Wiretapping of All Americans …

Then, it made me jump out of my chair while asking out loud: Where the heck is Sy Hersh?! Where has he been during the last two years plus?! We are talking about issues, scandals, wars, abuses of power …basically, all those topics that are, and have been, right up his alley!! So where is he?! Why haven’t I, we, heard much of him in the last two and a half years?! I am sure we haven’t missed it since when he writes on these issues we get to (justifiably, that is) hear the thunder, post-thunder, and echoes of his exposés. He couldn’t have run out of ‘thunder topics’ with the Obama administration’s relentless and nonstop assaults internationally and domestically!

I didn’t want to rely on my thoroughness in keeping track of Hersh’ long-winded and detailed investigative pieces in the New Yorker. Instead, I went to the New Yorker’s website and ran a search, and what I got was the following:

3 articles. Three articles. Only three articles since Mr. Obama’s presidential victory. That’s it. None of them on the scandals, issues and abuses of the Obama administration. None of them on Obama’s drone-mania. None of them on bombing and killing civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of them on the dubious brief assault in Yemen. None of them on Bagram torture-abuse-secret imprisonment. None of them on Libya. None of them on jailing Manning-DOD whistleblower or bringing criminal charges against other government whistleblowers. Instead of listing the long list of ‘Nones,’ I’ll give you the only three articles written by Hersh at the New Yorker:

Syria Calling: The Obama Administration’s Chance to Engage in a Middle East Peace- Published in April 2009.

Defending the Arsenal: In an Unstable Pakistan, can Nuclear Warheads be Kept Safe? Published in November 2009.

The Online Threat: Should we be Worry about a Cyber War? - Published in November 2010.

That is it. None of them on Mr. Obama, his hawkish administration, his military blunders or evil exercises, his continuation of prisons and torture, his ‘generals’ problems …No.

I went a bit further in this research venture. I started checking Hersh-New Yorker coverage of the Bush administration abuses during its first three years. In fact, I documented the exact time frame of existence (Bush first 2.5+ years). And, this is what I got:

13 articles. Thirteen hard-hitting well-written, thoroughly investigated, and unabashedly presented articles. Thirteen articles on abuses involving war(s), military, ‘generals’ games, prison and torture … You want to check it for yourself:

Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here. Point made, no?

Then I picked the last 2.5 years of the Bush administration, and here is the number of articles written by Mr. Hersh:

10 articles. Ten articles. Ten slamming, thunder-making, hard-hitting investigative articles. Here they are:

Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

Finally, I did my best to exclude factors such as death, being laid-off, major illness, etc. I could not find any of those factors. I also took into consideration the ‘writing book(s)’ factor, and when I compared the status on that factor for the same time period during the Bush-Cheney administration and Obama’s presidency, I found them to be pretty equal.

With all this, I raise the question: Is this a case of the left’s hypocrisy? Why have we been getting no dial tone when we dial Seymour Hersh-New Yorker? Is this a pure & simple case of blinded and biased partisanship that says: If Obama (A Democrat) Does ‘it’ we simply won’t cover it?! And, what do ‘you’ say?

# # # #

Here at Boiling Frogs Post we do NOT pick or choose topics-issues based on partisanship. Please Support us and let us present to you truly independent work. Thank You!

Please Donate Now

MSM-Notes on the Margin

Maybe...

Seymour Hersh was recently interviewed by Gulf News, during which he talked about Cheney’s Secret Assassination Unit under JSOC. The topic of the interview is important and warrants its own post, especially now that President Obama is considering Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal as a replacement for Gen. McKiernan, the top US and NATO Commander in Afghanistan. McChrystal happens to be the man who commanded Cheney’s JSOC. As I said, this is an important topic on its own, but here is what I got from the interview:


How closely is the new US administration looking at your revelations?


“Publicly they don't say anything at all. It's obvious I have credibility because I've written things that have turned out right. My colleagues at the press corps often don't follow up, not because they don't want to but because they don't know who to call. If I'm writing something on the Joint Special Operations Command, which is an ostensibly classified unit, how do they find it out? The government will tell them everything I write is wrong or that they can't comment. It's easy for those stories to be dismissed.”

I take this as a loaded comment on the MSM. It is almost like the ‘Clintonian’ definition of ‘is.’ The ‘can’t’ doesn’t seem to be based on a ‘pledge to secrecy no matter how wrong or criminal the deed.’ Because these sources obviously ‘can’ comment when it is Seymour Hersh, but they ‘can’t’ comment when it comes to other MSM reporters. It seems to me they are using ‘can’t’ as in I can’t trust you to comment.

Another point I got from this is that the large and prestigious news agencies’ reporters who are specialized in Pentagon and DOD areas ‘don’t know who to call.’ Can you hear me whistling here, whistling not as in ‘whistleblowing,’ but as in ‘wow’ whistling 😉 Maybe Hersh is trying to convey a coded message to these veteran expert but pitiful reporters: ‘Guys, you won’t get the real story, the truth, if you keep calling the press offices of these agencies, and, print what they are faxing you.’ Maybe he means ‘dear colleagues, you can’t get the truth when you only deal with government designated sources.’ Just Maybe.