Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us


Hannity Caves to Boycott Threats, Will Not Discuss Seth Rich ‘For Now’



Fox News host Sean Hannity announced on his show on Tuesday evening that he will no longer be investigating the murder of Seth Rich “at this time,” amid calls to boycott his highly lucrative shows.

In a statement towards the beginning of Tuesday’s episode, Hannity stated that he is in contact with the family of Rich, and “out of respect for their wishes” will not be discussing the murder case any further at this time.

“I cannot imagine the pain that they are in and as a father when I saw the video of the parents online saying they want answers — and I know the brother Aaron started a GoFundMe page — it truly pained me. However, out of respect for the families wishes — for now — I am not discussing the matter at this time,” Hannity said, buckling to pressure.

Later in the show, he urged viewers to “not read into this,” during an uncharacteristically nervous sounding statement and claimed that his effort to find the truth would continue.

Trending: DOCUMENT: Peter Strzok Was CIA And FBI At The Same Time, Say Experts

“Please do not interpret what I’m saying tonight to mean anything — don’t read into this — I promise you I am not going to stop doing my job — to the extent of my ability. I am not going to stop trying to find the truth,” he said. “That effort is not stopping in any way shape matter or form. I am continuing the work I promise to do every day for you — and at the proper time we shall continue to talk a lot more.”

This complete 180 and failed promise to investigate the case comes amid calls for boycotts of his shows — on which he makes a $29 million salary between his radio and TV gigs.

Earlier in the day, Kim Dotcom, a tech entrepreneur who is close to WikiLeaks, released a public statement declaring that Rich was the leaker — and that he knows this because he was in contact with him.

“I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich,” Kim wrote in his statement. “Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.”

Dotcom added that, “he wanted to change that from the inside.”

Dotcom stated that he would provide the evidence that he has to authorities if proper arrangements could be made to ensure he would not be arrested.

Following Dotcom’s statement, mainstream media suddenly gained scruples about covering murder investigations. Pundits, journalists and Democratic Party insiders immediately sprung into action viciously attacking and attempting to shut down any coverage of the new allegations — because a Democratic crisis manager who is representing the family told them to. Anyone who dared to report the highly newsworthy claims was immediately branded “insensitive to the family,” “ghoulish,” and “fake news,” as CNN talking head Ana Navarro recently labeled Big League Politics.

The panicked outrage from the mainstream media and liberal Twitter trolls has gone so far that they were actively calling for people to boycott advertisers on Hannity’s show to silence him.

“IMPORTANT! Mediamatters is trying to silence me, get me fired, pressure my advertising on radio & TV. Liberal Fascism. I need your help!!” Hannity tweeted.

He added in a subsequent tweet, “huge announcement tonight about Seth Rich, Trump/Russian Collusion corrupt media, the liberal effort to silence me. And my future at Fox!”

Apparently, their efforts were successful.

What the Fox News host failed to mention is that not a single one of these outlets have ever had a single concern about spreading rumors, innuendos, and information from anonymous sources in past murder cases — which they frequently sensationalize for ratings.

For example, did any of these outlets have the same concern while stalking the grieving grandmother of Caylee Anthony in her front yard — or insinuating that the nine-year-old brother of Jonbenet Ramsey was actually a sexual predator murderer? Those families begged for the media frenzy, largely fed by network news, to stop as well. Hungry for viewers — the invasive coverage continued.

While nobody wishes harm or additional pain on the Rich family — if he was the leaker, as Assange has implied and Dotcom has asserted — it is in the public interest to find out and stop the Russian hacking narrative in its tracks. If he is not, perhaps the additional eyes and attention can help alert someone with knowledge of the murder to the fact that there is a massive reward — and maybe justice can be served.

These same outlets shaming those who dare to cover the Rich case following the allegations from Dotcom — a friend of WikiLeaks who went on record using his name — also frequently publish unverified or unsubstantiated claims from anonymous sources in attempts to push the unproven Russian conspiracy theory.

As nonpartisan journalist Tim Pool pointed out in his own video discussing the issue, if a reporter had said that they had an anonymous source linking Rich to WikiLeaks — would you be more inclined to believe it than you are to believe Dotcom using his name?

“If we are going to say that anonymous the sources from CNN and the New York Times are acceptable then anonymous the sources from Fox News are also acceptable. If we’re going to say that anonymous sources are acceptable, then why isn’t Kim Dotcom credible? We can’t discredit him simply because we don’t like him. The truth is, if a journalist came out and said an anonymous source tells me Seth Rich WAS the leaker — would people believe it because a journalist said it? What if the anonymous source was Kim Dotcom?” Pool asks.

Julian Assange has alluded to Rich being his source on multiple occasions, while repeatedly reminding the public and media that he never gives up his sources.

After Dotcom first went public with his claims about having known Rich, Assange tweeted that though WikiLeaks won’t identify sources — sometimes their sources reveal themselves to other people. He also included the #SethRich hashtag in his tweet.

The organization has also retweeted multiple articles claiming that Rich was their source and offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the person or persons responsible.

“Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often significant risks. There was a 27-year old that works for the DNC who was shot in the back… murdered.. for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington,” Assange said during an interview with Dutch TV last year. When asked by the host if he would suggest that Rich was involved, he stated that “we have to understand how high the stakes are in the United States and that our sources face serious risks… that’s why they come to us so we can protect their anonymity.”

Rich was shot in the back near his home around 4:19 a.m. on July 10, 2016. Twelve days later, WikiLeaks would release the first of the leaked emails from the DNC — which would ultimately reveal that Donna Brazile had leaked debate questions to Hillary Clinton during the primaries and lead to the resignation of Democratic Party Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

Democratic Party Crisis Consultant Brad Bauman is now representing the Rich family, and has put out multiple strange and aggressive statements insisting that even if emails to WikiLeaks are found — it would not prove that there was any foul play.

As Big League Politics has previously reported:

“Bauman is a well-known Democratic crisis communications consultant and former Democratic staffer. He is a co-founder and partner of the firm the Pastorum Group. Fellow co-founder Josh Cohen has written for The Atlantic Council, the George Soros-funded think tank that targets pro-Trump journalists, and fellow co-founder Michelle Coyle Edwards was an executive at Rising Tide, which was a Ready For Hillary client.

On his show last Tuesday, before caving to pressure, Hannity asserted that if the claims are true, “this could become one of the biggest scandals in American history, and could mean that Rich could have been murdered under very suspicious circumstances.”


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Democrat Congressman BLOCKS U.S. Veterans After Saying Strzok Deserves Purple Heart



After receiving massive blowback and criticism for proclaiming that disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok deserves a purple heart, Congressman Steve Cohen, a Democrat who represents Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District, has decided to block Veterans who are responding to his ignorant remarks on Twitter.

During Strzok’s Congressional testimony on Thursday, Rep. Cohen sparked outrage when he told disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok that he should be awarded a Purple Heart.

“If I could give you a Purple Heart, I would. You deserve one. This has been an attack on you, in a way to attack Mr. Mueller, in the investigation that is to get at Russia collusion involved in our election,” Rep. Cohen said.
Cohen’s belief that Strzok deserves a Purple Heart, one of the highest military decorations that is awarded in the name of the US president to members of the military who are wounded or killed in any action against an enemy of the United States, quickly sparked outrage online by people who knew better than to make such a disrespectful and insulting comparison.

After receiving a lot of backlash the day following the testimony, Cohen said he now regrets what he said. “I regret using the term ‘Purple Heart.’ I used it metaphorically, not literally. I never thought literally it should be given to Agent Strzok.”

Instead of apologizing to Veterans who fought and risked their lives for our country, Rep. Cohen is using the block feature on Twitter so that Veterans and other critics can’t respond to Rep. Cohen.

Rep. Cohen has blocked so many veterans that a Twitter user created a Twitter page for all of the people, mostly veterans, who have been blacked by Cohen.

Hundreds of users took to Twitter on Saturday morning to explain why they are blocked by Rep. Cohen with the hashtag #HeBlockedMeToo.


“I wish my four surgeries to rebuild me were metaphoric. You owe us an apology, not a clarification of the words you used,” one U.S. Veteran tweeted.

One user tweeted, “I told him the story of how my uncle got his Purple Heart in Vietnam & died from Agent Orange. Told him he owed Veterans a very public apology. He blocked me.”

Despite these heartfelt messages from twitter users whose family members received the Purple Heart and veterans who were wounded in war, Rep. Cohen has continued to block people, blocking
Generals, Colonels, members of Congress and wounded Veterans.

US Army veteran Mark Footerman, who is also a fellow for Hill Vets, an organization that encourages veterans to create global impact tweeted, “Member of Congress, Rep. Cohen, has blocked me, an Army veteran, for criticizing his deeply disturbing statement that Peter Strzok deserves a Purple Heart because he has sat through a tough congressional hearing.”

A female combat veteran tweeted, “I was blocked but @RepCohen is a coward…this female Marine Veteran will call TN Rep Steve Cohen a coward all day @RepCohen is a coward #RepCohenIsACowardlyDemrat Democrats can’t handle the truth.”

James T, A US Air Force Veteran tweeted, “Funny, I just checked and I’m blocked too and I’ve never tweeted about him or to him. Maybe he blocks all veterans. What an ass.”

A wounded combat veteran tweeted, “This is what happens when a wounded vet stands up to a Congressman who wants to give a Purple Heart to lying, narcissistic cheater. Apparently, he [Rep.Cohen] hates Veterans.”

One user who said they only created Twitter so that they could reply to Cohen’s outrageous comments said they were immediately blocked by the Congressman. “I joined Twitter so that my voice would get through to @RepCohen. Looks like it did. He blocked me 1 hour and 30 min after I created my Twitter account.”

Cohen’s belief that Strzok deserves a Purple Heart, one of the highest military decorations that is awarded in the name of the US president to members of the military who are wounded or killed in any action against an enemy of the United States, quickly sparked outrage online by people who knew better than to make such a disrespectful and insulting comparison.

Not only was Rep. Cohen’s statement a slap in the face to all service men and women who have fought and served for the United States, but his intentional blocking of Veterans suggests that he has no respect or consideration for US veterans. On top of being anti-Veteran, anti-American, and anti-free speech, Rep. Cohen’s actions may have him in direct violation of the law. In May, a federal district court judge ruled that President Trump can’t block people from following his Twitter account. According to the judge, elected officials who block tweets with differing opinions constitutes viewpoint discrimination, which violates the First Amendment.

Thus, if President Trump cannot block twitter users who have opposing views, neither can Rep. Cohen, who is also an elected US politician.

Rep. Cohen’s office did not reply with a request for comment as to why the Democrat Congressman is intentionally blocking US veterans and Conservatives on Twitter.

Here is a collection of tweets from other US veterans and twitter users who also took to social media to ask why they had been blocked by Rep.Cohen.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×

Thanks for sharing!

We invite you to become a Big League Politics insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to a friend