Connect with us

Politics

BBC Fires Top Presenter Accused of Paying Teen $45K For Sexually Explicit Photos

Published

on

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) announced Wednesday they had fired top presenter Huw Edwards following reports he illegally paid tens of thousands of dollars to a teenager in exchange for sexually explicit photos.

The allegations against Edwards, whose almost 40-year career includes announcing Queen Elizabeth’s passing on television, came over the weekend in an article from The Sun. The post didn’t specifically name Edwards, instead referring to him as a “familiar face who is known to millions.”

The Sun reported that it had spoken to the child’s family, who claimed that Edwards had paid their child upwards of £35,000 ($45,400 USD) over the course of three years for filthy images and sexual performances, which the boy had used to support a crack cocaine addiction. The child is now 20 years old.

The furious mother told last night how her child had gone from “a happy-go-lucky youngster to a ghost-like crack addict” in just three years.

They approached The Sun, making it clear they wanted no payment.

The mother said: “All I want is for this man to stop paying my child for sexual pictures and stop him funding my child’s drug habit.”

She told how her child, now 20, had shown her an online bank statement that had numerous deposits from the star.

Holding back tears, she added: “There were huge sums, hundreds, or thousands of pounds at a time. 

“One time he had sent £5,000 in one lump. The money had been in exchange for sexually explicit photographs of my child.” 

When the child was 17 years old in 2020, shady messages allegedly began.

According to the presenter’s family, he never concealed his name and even shared photos of himself at work.

She said she was told the star requested “performances” and, heartbreakingly, her child said they would “get their bits out”.

Seven weeks ago, the family informed the BBC about the allegations, and the BBC assured them that they would be investigated. Edwards remained on broadcast during this time.

Several BBC presenters came forward to publicly defend themselves as rumors about the identity of the unknown “household name” spread.

After reading the allegations from The Sun on Saturday, the BBC fired Edwards. The network was also mandated to “urgently” look into the claims by the UK government.

The BBC said Edwards was the person of interest and had been fired on Wednesday. They also said at least three other BBC employees had lodged claims against him alleging “inappropriate behavior.”

Following the announcement, Edwards’ wife came forward to say that her husband suffers “from serious mental health issues” and “has been treated for severe depression in recent years.”

“The events of the last few days have greatly worsened matters, he has suffered another serious episode and is now receiving in-patient hospital care where he’ll stay for the foreseeable future.

“Once well enough to do so, he intends to respond to the stories that have been published.

“To be clear Huw was first told that there were allegations being made against him last Thursday.

“In the circumstances and given Huw’s condition I would like to ask that the privacy of my family and everyone else caught up in these upsetting events is respected. I know that Huw is deeply sorry that so many colleagues have been impacted by the recent media speculation. We hope this statement will bring that to an end.”

The wife’s statement bizarrely came just moments after the Metropolitan Police released a statement claiming there was no evidence a criminal offense was committed.

“The Met Police said detectives from its specialist crime command have ‘concluded their assessment and have determined there is no information to indicate that a criminal offence has been committed’,” reported Sky News.

However, the matter may only get worse for Edwards as The Sun has subsequently suggested he’s possibly a serial offender and also allegedly sent “threatening and abusive messages” to another person who threatened to reveal his identity.

The newspaper reported Wednesday that “Since The Sun revealed the allegations a further three youngsters have come forward.”

Yesterday, a second person claimed they received “threatening messages” from the suspended presenter.

The person in their early 20s claimed to the BBC that Edwards contacted them anonymously using a dating app before pressuring them to meet up.

They said that after striking up a chat on a dating app, Edwards’ name was disclosed.

Edwards is then accused of sending the “menacing” and “abusive” messages after the second youngster suggested naming him online.

BBC News claimed it has seen the messages from the presenter to the young person and verified the phone number of Edwards.

A third youngster approached The Sun and claimed the star broke Covid lockdown laws to meet them, while a fourth told us they received inappropriate messages from the broadcaster from when they were 17.

The BBC presenter’s ousting was mocked by none other than male empowerment guru Andrew Tate, who shared a video of Edwards reporting on fake news involving him.

The BBC’s lack of immediate action despite the seriousness of the allegations is eerily reminiscent of their alleged efforts to cover-up the sordid acts of now-deceased former broadcaster and notorious pedophile Jimmy Savile.

Savile, who passed away in 2011, was a well-known BBC DJ who served as the show’s host twice, first from 1964 to 1973 and subsequently from 1975 to 1984. He was suspected of abusing hundreds of victims throughout that time, some of whom were youngsters as young as eight.

InfoWars helped contribute to this article:

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Biden Administration

REPORT: U.S. quietly facilitated over 100 arms sales to Israel without approval of Congress

Published

on

The United States has approved and delivered on more than 100 arms sales to Israel since October 7, U.S. officials recently told Congress in a classified briefing, according to a Washington Post report on Wednesday.

The report, citing unnamed US officials, revealed that thousands of precision-guided munitions, small-diameter bombs, and other weapons were sold. These sales didn’t require prior approval from Congress as each fell below the minimum amount for consideration. Former Biden administration official Jeremy Konyndyk, speaking to the Washington Post, suggested that the high volume of sales in a short period indicates Israel’s reliance on U.S. support for its operations against Hamas in Gaza. Konyndyk, now president of Refugees International, urged the U.S. to leverage weapons sales to pressure Israel into accepting a ceasefire in Gaza.

State Department spokesman Matt Miller told the Washington Post that the Biden administration has “followed the procedures Congress itself has specified to keep members well-informed, and regularly briefs members even when formal notification is not a legal requirement.”

U.S. officials have “engaged Congress” on arms deliveries to Israel “more than 200 times” since October, Miller said.

The report said a senior State Department official declined to provide the total number of all US weapons transferred to Israel, or their costs, since Oc tober 7, but said they include new sales and “active” foreign military sales or FMSs.

“These are items that are typical for any modern military, including one that is as sophisticated as Israel’s,” the official said.

In a Wednesday column, David Ignatius of the Washington Post reported that the U.S. is contemplating measures to prevent Israel from deploying American arms in an anticipated offensive in Rafah, a southern city in Gaza where over half of the territory’s population has sought refuge during the conflict. The U.S. has emphasized that Israel must demonstrate a strategy to safeguard civilians before initiating a ground operation in Rafah. While Israel has committed to evacuating residents, it has not finalized its military strategy or disclosed relocation plans for civilians.

Ignatius wrote that US President Joe Biden and other officials “haven’t made any decision about imposing ‘conditionality’ on US weapons. But the very fact that officials seem to be debating this extreme step shows the administration’s growing concern about the crisis in Gaza.”

“If Israel launches an offensive in Rafah without adequately protecting the displaced civilian population, it may precipitate an unprecedented crisis in US-Israel relations, even involving arms supplies,” former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk was quoted as saying in the column.

Democratic lawmakers are urging the Biden administration to pressure Israel into alleviating the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza. Some are considering withholding approved military aid if conditions for civilians do not improve. Senator Chris Van Hollen emphasized the need for leveraging all available influence, urging the administration to hold back military assistance unless Israel takes steps to facilitate aid shipments into Gaza.

Israeli claims that aid deliveries are hindered by logistical issues have been met with skepticism. The White House has refrained from imposing conditions on aid to Israel, prompting concerns among lawmakers about the escalating crisis. Discussions of potential actions coincide with President Biden’s upcoming State of the Union address, where policy priorities will be outlined. The possibility of withholding arms sales to Israel under US law is also being considered, though it could spark contentious debates. Additionally, House Democrats have expressed deep concern about the plight of civilians in Gaza, further underscoring the urgency of addressing the humanitarian crisis amid ongoing conflict.

Continue Reading

2024 Race

Michelle Obama’s office says the former first lady ‘will not be running for president’ in 2024

Published

on

Former President Barack Obama’s vocal support for President Joe Biden’s re-election bid has sparked speculation about the potential role of his wife, Michelle Obama, in the upcoming election.

Many Democrats are eager to see Michelle Obama take on a more prominent role, with some even pondering the possibility of her replacing a politically weakened Biden on the 2024 ticket. However, supporters of Republican front-runner Donald Trump have seized on this speculation to undermine Biden’s political standing and rally GOP supporters.

In response to these rumors, Michelle Obama’s office has reiterated that she has no plans to run for president in 2024. Crystal Carson, director of communications for her office, has emphasized Michelle Obama’s support for President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris’ re-election campaign, and says Michelle will not be running for president.

While Michelle Obama intends to assist the Biden campaign this fall, her involvement is expected to be limited, reflecting her existing commitments and her reluctance to fully re-enter the political arena. Sources familiar with the discussions suggest that the Biden campaign may capitalize on Michelle Obama’s star power later in the campaign, particularly when swing voters are more engaged.

The Biden campaign has expressed gratitude for the support of both Barack and Michelle Obama in previous elections. Campaign spokesperson Kevin Munoz highlighted Michelle Obama’s involvement with When We All Vote, a nonpartisan voter registration group, as an area of alignment with the Biden campaign’s goals.

Despite persistent speculation about her political ambitions, Michelle Obama has consistently downplayed the possibility of seeking public office. In interviews, she has emphasized the challenges of politics and expressed her aversion to questions about running for president.

However, some observers note instances where Michelle Obama has left the door open to the idea of holding public office in the future. Amid speculation about Biden’s potential running mate in 2020, an exchange between CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota and Jill Biden suggested Michelle Obama as a possible candidate. While Jill Biden laughed off the suggestion, Michelle Obama’s allies reportedly expressed dissatisfaction with her response, prompting discussions about crafting a more ambiguous statement regarding her future plans.

Michelle Obama’s partnership with Jill Biden during their time as first and second ladies underscores their close relationship, particularly in initiatives like Joining Forces to support military families. Despite the ongoing speculation, Michelle Obama’s intentions regarding future political involvement remain unclear, leaving room for continued speculation and discussion within political circles.

Continue Reading

Biden Administration

Supreme Court Temporarily Halts Texas Law Allowing State Immigration Enforcement

Published

on

In a contentious battle between federal and state authority over immigration enforcement, the Supreme Court has temporarily halted a Texas law that permits state officials to arrest illegal immigrants. The decision comes amidst escalating tensions between Texas and the Biden administration regarding border security measures.

Associate Justice Samuel Alito imposed the stay after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the Texas law to take effect on March 10, according to reports from NBC. This move follows U.S. District Judge David Ezra’s initial stay late last month.

Alito’s decision to grant the stay came in response to a plea from the Biden administration and will remain in effect until March 13. Texas has been given until March 11 to respond to the administration’s arguments.

Judge Ezra, in his original stay, expressed concerns that the Texas law could allow the state to override federal directives permanently. He warned against the notion of nullifying federal law and authority, which he argued is antithetical to the Constitution and has been consistently rejected by federal courts since the Civil War.

The clash between Texas and the federal government has intensified under the Biden administration, particularly concerning Operation Lone Star. This unilateral effort by Texas aims to secure the border amid what the state perceives as federal apathy toward the surge in illegal crossings.

One of the most notable points of contention has been Texas’ deployment of a buoy barrier in the Rio Grande river and its construction of concertina-wire fencing along the Mexican frontier to deter illegal entrants.

The decision by the Supreme Court to temporarily halt the Texas law underscores the ongoing struggle between state and federal authorities regarding immigration policy and enforcement. It highlights the complex legal and constitutional issues surrounding states’ rights versus federal supremacy in matters of immigration control.

While the temporary stay provides a brief respite, the underlying tensions between Texas and the federal government are far from resolved. The outcome of this legal battle will have significant implications for immigration policy and the balance of power between state and federal authorities in the United States. As the deadline for the stay approaches, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court and the subsequent actions of the Texas government and the Biden administration.

Continue Reading

Trending