WATCH: Anthony Weiner Melts Down When Asked About Clinton Associate ‘Suicide’ Epidemic

 WATCH: Anthony Weiner Melts Down When Asked About Clinton Associate ‘Suicide’ Epidemic

(AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

In light of the recent unexplained death of Obama’s personal chef near the ex-president’s residence, a clip of Anthony Weiner, a long-time ally of the Clintons and the estranged husband of Hillary’s aide Huma Abedin, discussing the unusual number of deaths among Clinton associates, is particularly relevant.

In his radio show, host Patrick Bet-David broaches the topic of the so-called Clinton death machine by enumerating 46 alleged suicides or murders of Clinton associates over time.

(For complete transparency, I haven’t scrutinized the validity of every single name on the list, as the truthfulness of these claims is not the focal point of this story.)

Weiner predictably and promptly dismisses the allegations as conspiracy theories and declines to address any specific points. However, having been immersed in high-ranking political circles for many years, he presumably has detailed information about several individuals on the list.

As the segment continues, Weiner’s behavior becomes increasingly erratic, berating PBD’s credibility and labeling the source as “insane”. He then attempts to portray himself as an advocate for the deceased, arguing that PBD is tarnishing their reputation by questioning the cause of their deaths. The 19-minute segment is quite a spectacle.

Weiner’s overreaction only adds fuel to speculation about the number of dead aides, former business partners, etc., associated with the Clintons. “Your reaction is an answer,” PBD retorts.

Weiner’s intense reaction only heightens viewer suspicions, potentially spurring them to delve deeper into the enigma. If Weiner had reacted more calmly, it is likely that the matter would have been forgotten after the podcast.

This well-known occurrence is referred to as the Streisand Effect. The Britannica defines it as a phenomenon where attempts to censor, hide, or divert attention from something, only amplifies the attention it receives. The term originated from a 2003 lawsuit where actress Barbara Streisand attempted to remove a legally acquired photograph of her property from the internet, inadvertently drawing more attention to it.

The Streisand Effect is amplified by modern corporate state censorship that tries to deem certain topics off-limits, extending beyond casual conjecture on a radio show to include subjects like COVID vaccine effectiveness (or lack thereof), climate change skepticism, and alleged criminal activities by shielded members of the Deep State, such as the Clintons and Obamas.

Related post