• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • Podcast
  • Full Measure
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • "Slanted" Preorder here

Sharyl Attkisson

Untouchable Subjects. Fearless, Nonpartisan Reporting.

  • US
  • World
  • Business
  • Health
    • Vaccine, Medical links
  • Special Investigations
    • Attkisson v. DOJ
    • Benghazi
    • "Collusion v. Trump" TL
    • Fake News
    • Fast and Furious
    • Media Mistakes on Trump
    • Obama Surveillance TL
    • Obamacare

News

“Snopes” Gets an “F” for Predictable Propaganda in Vaccine-Autism debate

  • Snopes claims to expose “misleading” statements, but ultimately confirms the report it attempts to smear.
  • Alex Kasprak, author of the Snopes propaganda article, was once “a staff science writer at BuzzFeed.”

I have long written about propagandists’ use of sites such as Snopes and Wikipedia. Both are littered with false and misleading information mixed in with some real, benign and true information. That’s what makes it so dangerous to the uninitiated.

Now, Snopes purports to fact check my recent investigative report on the respected, pro-vaccine doctor who worked as an expert witness for the government and signed a sworn affidavit stating that vaccines can cause autism, after all, in exceptional cases. Dr. Andrew Zimmerman further states that government lawyers, who defend vaccine companies in federal vaccine court, misrepresented his opinion in order to continue to debunk vaccine-autism claims.

The report, which aired in an episode of Full Measure, received more positive feedback than any other single story we’ve produced. The story stuck to the facts, which poses a particular problem for vaccine industry interests, some of which are connected to the government. They have worked hard to shape a narrative that is often at odds with peer-reviewed science, medical opinions and court decisions. They want the public to believe “there is no debate” over vaccines and autism, even as the issues is as debated as ever — if not more so. They seek to label efforts to improve vaccine-safety as “anti-vaccine,” and to censor discussion of the topic.

The entire Snopes article is written to try to convince people to dismiss vaccine-autism links. But interestingly, in the end, Snopes agrees with the essence of my report as well as the essence of Dr. Zimmerman’s claim: 

“Zimmerman, a scientist with serious credentials who was once a government expert on vaccines, believes that narrow circumstances might exist in which the combination of pre-existing mitochondrial dysfunction and vaccination could trigger ASD.” --Snopes


That’s just what I reported. And coming from a respected, pro-vaccine scientists, it’s something that most people had never heard. Which is why it made such big news.

But the Snopes article debunks claims that were never made and uses one-sided references as its sources— other propagandists— without disclosing their vaccine industry ties.

  • Snopes states that Dr. Zimmerman supports vaccination, as if that were hidden in my report. In fact, that was a crucial and prominent component of the story. It’s what makes Dr. Zimmerman such an important and credible voice on this issue, similar to scientists such as Dr. Bernadine Healy, former Director of the National Institutes of Health (also pro-vaccine).
  • Snopes claims my reading of Dr. Zimmerman’s sworn affidavit on the issue was flawed. In fact, I simply quoted from the affidavit. Snopes simply wants readers to believe its spin rather than the affidavit itself.
  • Snopes—as vaccine industry propagandists routinely do—attempts to misattribute all of the suspected vaccine-autism link to a retracted study from years ago. In fact, there is a great deal of peer-reviewed research, scientists and court cases supporting the notion of a link between vaccine and autism.
  • Snopes states that Dr. Zimmerman’s view is “not held by many scientists.” That may or may not be the case; but Snopes did not survey several reputable scientists I know who hold the view, so it’s unclear how Snopes would know how many scientists are in that camp. 
  • Snopes omits mention of the fact that the very view it claims is “not held by many scientists” was expressed by the former NIH Director, Dr. Bernadine Healy, among others, and was even acknowledged as a possibility by the CDC’s current head of immunization safety, Dr. Frank DeStefano.
  • Snopes brings up a retracted study that has nothing to do with my report or Dr. Zimmerman’s opinion, in order to try to taint and confuse the entire issue. Further, Snopes ignores questioned studies and scientists on the other side of the issue.
  • Under the subtitle: “Attkisson’s Claims, Addressed,” Snopes lists claims I never made, and then declares them to be false.  “Claim: The legal decisions refuting a connection between autism and vaccination during the Omnibus Autism Proceeding rested primarily on the written testimony of Andrew Zimmerman.” In fact, my report never discussed whether Dr. Zimmerman’s testimony was written, and I didn’t state that the legal decisions rested primarily on his oral or written testimony.
  • In another section, Snopes attributes to my reporting “Claim: Zimmerman’s knowledge about a potential circumstance in which a vaccine could theoretically affect ASD was hidden from the public until he came forward in 2018.” Again, there is no such claim in my report. In fact, I have reported in the past that Dr. Zimmerman’s views on a vaccine-autism link in a separate lawsuit became public in 2006 despite the government’s effort to have the case sealed so the public would never know, as government officials continued to tell parents they were crazy if they suspected any link.
  • Snopes itself is incorrect in one of its own original claims: “The existence of an alleged [vaccine-autism] mitochondrial disorder-autism link, which remains murky to this day, is not news now, and it would not have been news during the time the omnibus cases were deliberated.” In fact, this suspected link was not previously known before the so-called “omnibus” groups of vaccine-autism cases litigated a decade ago, and it is not widely known among doctors or the general public today; at least as of recently. That's why it has proven to be so newsworthy.
  • Notably, Snopes fails to address what its headline promises: the question of whether the government censored its own expert witness’ opinion. According to Dr. Zimmerman’s sworn affidavit, once he told government lawyers that vaccines can cause autism after all in exceptional cases and warned them not to misrepresent his opinion, they went on to do just that.
  • Finally, Snopes wrote its entire article— without contacting me. Therefore, Snopes demonstrates reckless disregard for the truth when disparaging my reporting by falsely stating that it contains “misleading claims.” Snopes fabricates claims that were never made, debunks the fabricated claims, and then ultimately agrees that the report I produced was accurate.

Refuting claims never made in my report and putting out one-sided vaccine propaganda makes one wonder whether Snopes author Alex Kasprak even read or watched the report he attempts to criticize, or just blindly printed the propaganda provided to him by vaccine industry interests.


Now, more than ever: do your own research, make up your own mind, think for yourself. Links to resources below so you can do just that.

The Full Measure report:

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/the-vaccination-debate

Dr. Andrew Zimmerman’s full affidavit:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2019/01/06/dr-andrew-zimmermans-full-affidavit-on-alleged-link-between-vaccines-and-autism-that-u-s-govt-covered-up/


Analysis of Dr. Zimmerman’s affidavit:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2019/01/06/analysis-of-dr-zimmermans-affidavit-regarding-vaccines-causing-autism-in-exceptional-cases/

Dr. Bernadine Healy on vaccine-autism link:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2019/01/06/former-head-of-national-institutes-of-health-on-vaccine-autism-link/

CDC head of immunization safety stating “possibility” that vaccines trigger autism in rare cases:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2018/12/10/cdc-possibility-that-vaccines-rarely-trigger-autism/

The Hill article:

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/425061-how-a-pro-vaccine-doctor-reopened-debate-about-link-to-autism

Snopes propaganda article:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/01/21/witness-view-vaccines-autism/
https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/01/21/witness-view-vaccines-autism/

A rebuttal to “there is no debate” narrative:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2019/01/19/vaccine-autism-link-a-rebuttal-to-the-there-is-no-debate-narrative/

Widespread praise for Full Measure’s vaccine-autism reporting:

https://sattkisson.wpengine.com/2019/01/10/sinclairs-full-measure-receives-widespread-praise-for-autism-vaccine-report/

Spy Class 101

Not long after I learn that there’s a former NSA guy at the helm of CBS information security, he sends a company-wide memo that seems to refer to my situation without mentioning me. The memo on June 7, 2013, explains what should be done if someone suspects a security breach of their CBS computers. Once the incident is reported, says the memo, there will be a response team that will take steps to resolve the issue.

Since the memo is clear that the victim has a duty to report, and since Molinoff has never acknowledged my incident nor has he con- tacted me, I send him an email asking whether he’s briefed up on my computer intrusions. I offer to answer any questions he may have. He doesn’t reply. A week later, I follow up. This time, I get a perfunctory response from Molinoff saying that he and his team are aware of the situation and take any breach “very, very seriously.” He asks no ques- tions and to this day no CBS security officials have attempted to ask me the details of what happened.

| SPY CLASS 101

As the story of the government’s overreach expands and word gets around about the investigation into my computers, sources step forward to privately offer me moral support, information, and assistance. They fill my head with stories about the government’s secret capabilities and how they could be misused by those with malicious motives.

For example, one of them tells me about a covert skill the U.S. government is actively perfecting: the ability to remotely control ve- hicles. There are several ways to do it. The former U.S. national coordinator for security, infrastructure protection, and counterterrorism Richard Clarke discussed the technology in a June 2013 interview with the Huffington Post. He said that intelligence agencies know how to remotely seize control of a car through a “car cyber attack.”

“It’s relatively easy to hack your way into the control system of a car, and to do such things as cause acceleration when the driver doesn’t want acceleration, to throw on the brakes when the driver doesn’t want the brakes on, to launch an air bag,” Clarke tells the online blog. “You can do some really highly destructive things now, through hacking a car, and it’s not that hard.”

In this particular interview, Clarke is responding to questions about the fatal single-car crash of reporter Michael Hastings as he was said to be researching a story related to the scandal that forced the resignation of CIA director Petraeus in 2012. Shortly before Hastings’s death, he reportedly said he thought the FBI was investigating him, which the FBI denied. Officials who investigated the car crash say no foul play was suspected and Clarke doesn’t dispute that. But Clarke says, hypothetically, “If there were a cyber attack on the car—and I’m not saying there was—I think whoever did it would probably get away with it.”

Clarke’s assessment of the available technology is based in part on a 2011 report by university computer scientists. It states that computer hackers can gain remote unauthorized access to vehicles much like a computer, controlling the engine and other basic functions. Apparently, the car hacking can be accomplished using cellular connections and Bluetooth wireless technology. Hackers can take control, track, and even listen in without having any direct physical access to the vehicle, according to one of the lead researchers, Stefan Savage of the University of California, San Diego.

My source tells me something about a related technology he says the government is developing. Covert operators can substitute the stock electronic control units in vehicles for special replacements: one to con- trol the car’s transmission and another that controls the engine. A re- mote controller can then slow, stop, or speed up the car and make it im- possible for the driver to do much about it. The government developers, working in secret with black budgets that don’t appear on any ledger, are having a little trouble keeping the demo units from overheating. They’re expediting the troubleshooting and sparing no expense. Money is no object. There’s an endless source of tax dollars for this project.

The source shows up at my house one wintry evening and wants to check out my car for anything suspicious. He says that I’ve upset so many people at high levels that anything is possible, even the idea that somebody has tampered with my vehicle. I appreciate the thought but tell him it’s unnecessary. He insists and my husband says to go ahead and let him look. It concerns me that somebody with links to covert agencies actually thinks that a government operative might be capable of sabotaging my car. The source and my husband spend forty-five minutes shivering in the garage, flashlight in hand, rooting around under the hood and in the front seat of my car, and find nothing.

As a matter of protecting my own interests, I’ve begun working with a small group of people who aren’t connected to CBS. This includes an attorney, another independent computer forensics expert, and several sources.

In July of 2013, I’m preparing to leave the country on vacation. It’ll feel good to get away from everything. But before I go, an acquaintance contacts an intermediary and asks me to call. It’s been more than a year since we last spoke.

To be continued...

[hr]Read excerpt #1 here: The Computer Intrusions: Up at Night

#2: Big Brother: First Warnings

#3: The Computer Intrusions: Disappearing Act

#4: The Incredible, Elusive "Verizon Man"

#5: I Spy: The Government's Secrets

#6: Computer Intrusions: The Discovery

#7: Notifying CBS About the Government Computer Intrusions

#8: The MCALLEN Case: Computer Intrusion Confirmed 

#9: The Disruptions Continue

#10: Revelations in the Government Computer Intrusion

#11: Obama Leak “Witch Hunt”

#12: Obama’s War on Leaks 

#13: The Computer Intrusions Become Public

#14: The Govt. Computer Intrusions: Word Spreads

#15: My Computer Intrusion and the National Connection 

#16: URGENT dispatch

#17: Clapper’s False Testimony

#18: Government Spying First Revealed

#19: How the FBI Missed the Boston Marathon Bombers

#20: The media operation against Snowden and the government computer intrusions

#21: Government Surveillance and Two-Tiered Justice

#22: Other Reporters Weigh in

#23: The CBS Connection

Rich in Congress

President Harry Truman once said “No young man should go into politics if he wants to get rich.” Maybe that was true once upon a time. Today, lots of people get rich in public service. We investigate some wealthy members of Congress— past and present. Some are self-made. For others— their road to riches is paved with controversy.

As we've fallen further into debt as a nation our members of Congress have collectively grown richer. 

Baumgart: We found that 60 percent on average of members have grown their net worths upon arriving in Congress at a rate that is faster than the American public than the average household, members of Congress lost less money during the recession. 

Alex Baumgart is a researcher at the watchdog Center for Responsive Politics. We asked him to crunch the latest financials for 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 Senators. The richest member overall and for the past decade is car alarm mogul Congressman Darrell Issa whose net worth is estimated at more than $323-million dollars. Next is Democrat Jared Polis, a tech guru, at 308 million. The richest Senator is Democrat Mark Warner. He made a killing as a venture capitalist. And rounding out the Top Ten are: John Delaney, Dave Trott, Trey Hollingsworth, Don Beyer, Tom Rooney, Dianne Feinstein, and Chris Collins.

Watch the video and read the rest of the Full Measure investigation here:

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/rich-in-congress

The CBS connection to the govt. computer intrusions

The following is the 23rd in a series of excerpts from my New York Times bestseller “Stonewalled,” which recounts the government intrusions of my computers. Links to previous excerpts at the end of this article.

On July 8, 2014, the Society of Professional Journalists directs a letter to President Obama objecting to what it calls the “politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies.” The esteemed group of journalists uses strongly worded phrases to make its point.

“We consider these restrictions a form of censorship.”
“The problem is getting worse throughout the nation.”
“It has not always been this way.”


I’m all too familiar with the pre-story stonewall. The post-storyharassment. The ignored requests for interviews and public infor- mation. But the Obama administration has aggressively employed the additional PR strategy: controversializing potentially damaging stories, reporters, and opponents to undermine them. It can be a highly effective tactic—unless the public learns to recognize it. Just how does one take a fact-based, solid story with sourced opinions— and turn it into a controversy to therefore be questioned by an un- suspecting public? By putting into motion a well-oiled machine that launches post-story complaint calls and emails; comments to other reporters (often not for attribution); bloggers who circulate manu- factured outrage and counterspin; and personal attacks against the journalist. Pretty soon, the administration has controversialized an entire line of reporting. Not because it is controversial, but because their machine has made it appear to be. They can point to blogs and articles that say so. Even Wikipedia says so, so it must be true!

Journalist Michael Hastings once discussed this phenomenon.

Hastings had authored the award-winning Rolling Stone profile of General Stanley McChrystal that led to McChrystal’s resignation. He spoke of the “insidious response . . . when you piss off the powerful. They come after your career; they try to come after your credibility. They do cocktail party whisper campaigns. They try to make you ‘controversial.’ Sadly, the Powers That Be are often aided by other journalists.”

| THE CBS CONNECTION

The Justice Department inspector general is looking into my computer intrusions and asks to see the CBS-commissioned report from Patel. The head of the IG forensics unit suggests that if we hand over my computers, his experts can conduct an independent analysis and possibly find more information, perhaps even the proof as to who’s responsible. The IG has its own technical staff and lab that are separate and apart from the FBI’s analysts. But CBS declines. One CBS official points out, as had Number One, that the IG works for the same agency that we believe is responsible.

“Do you really trust the IG?” the CBS official asks me. “Why should CBS trust our computers to the same agency that could be implicated?”

I explain my rationale. Worst-case scenario: the IG comes up with nothing more than we already know. Best-case scenario: he finds more. Who better than the government’s own technicians to dig into a government intrusion? But the bigger hurdle to the concept of handing over the CBS computer is that news organizations vehemently protect their independence and resist attempts by law enforcement to obtain company property. Granted, this situation is a bit different: the law enforcement body isn’t reaching into the news organization uninvited. Instead, a crime has been committed and the IG is asking for the computer and report to act in my interests. Nonetheless, policy is policy, there are legal implications, and CBS decides that the IG can’t have the CBS laptop computer or Patel’s report.

If no law enforcement or investigative body can have access to my CBS computer, then in some respects I’m the victim of a crime that can’t be thoroughly investigated. At least not the ordinary way. I can’t expect the FBI to investigate impartially if some of its people are involved in the crime. In fact, I can’t expect anyone to investigate if CBS won’t let them analyze the computer. And the main concern of CBS News is the integrity of its professional network systems rather than my individual circumstances. The corporation hasn’t demonstrated any interest in getting to the bottom of the crime committed against me and my family, and potentially my sources. The news division hasn’t expressed even a modicum of concern for my potentially compromised and chilled sources or its own compromised newsroom operations.It didn’t make sense that the moment I reported the intrusion, no alarm bells were sounded at the highest levels of the CBS corporation. I imagined there would be technology security experts who would ask a lot of questions, visit my house, and devise ways to make me feel more secure and to ensure that all of CBS’s sources and materials are protected. I thought they’d want to examine my supposedly compromised smartphones. But nobody did.

In fact, CBS has specialists tasked with doing this very sort of work, but I only learn of them when a colleague asks me what work the “special team” is doing on my case.

“What special team?” I ask.

“The guys headed up by Joel Molinoff,” says my colleague. “Haven’t they been working on your case?”

“Never heard of them.”

My colleague is surprised. He goes on to explain that Molinoff is CBS’s chief information security officer. He’s held seminars with 60 Minutes staff on cybersecurity issues such as protecting their information abroad. He’s a wealth of information and a great resource on computer security. But in all these months, he’s yet to reach out to me. “He’s a former NSA guy,” adds my colleague. “I’ll find his extension and send it to you.”

A former NSA guy?

I do a quick Internet search. It turns out that Molinoff came to CBS after having just served in Obama’s White House as the assistant director of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board. Prior to that, says his bio, he was an executive at the NSA.

Why wouldn’t a guy with that kind of background be keenly interested and involved in investigating my computer intrusions?

To be continued...

[hr]Read excerpt #1 here: The Computer Intrusions: Up at Night

#2: Big Brother: First Warnings

#3: The Computer Intrusions: Disappearing Act

#4: The Incredible, Elusive "Verizon Man"

#5: I Spy: The Government's Secrets

#6: Computer Intrusions: The Discovery

#7: Notifying CBS About the Government Computer Intrusions

#8: The MCALLEN Case: Computer Intrusion Confirmed 

#9: The Disruptions Continue

#10: Revelations in the Government Computer Intrusion

#11: Obama Leak “Witch Hunt”

#12: Obama’s War on Leaks 

#13: The Computer Intrusions Become Public

#14: The Govt. Computer Intrusions: Word Spreads

#15: My Computer Intrusion and the National Connection 

#16: URGENT dispatch

#17: Clapper’s False Testimony

#18: Government Spying First Revealed

#19: How the FBI Missed the Boston Marathon Bombers

#20: The media operation against Snowden and the government computer intrusions

#21: Government Surveillance and Two-Tiered Justice

#22: Other Reporters Weigh in

Vaccine-autism link: A rebuttal to the "There is no debate" narrative

The following is a commentary written by:Alison Fujito

Some people are unable to see any perspective other than their own.


It’s already disturbing when they insist, over and over, that opposing facts don’t exist, as though repetition can make unpleasant truths disappear. But when they resort to misdirection, deliberate pejoratives, and outright lies, there is more going on than just myopia.

This past week, in response to Sharyl Attkisson’s op-ed two days prior, vaccine developer Dr. Peter Hotez wrote an op-ed piece in The Hill, claiming “there is no debate” in a manner eerily reminiscent of “the Party is always right” from George Orwell’s 1984. 

The entire basis of Attkisson’s piece was the recent affidavit of Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, one of the country’s top pediatric neurologists, who served as the US government’s expert witness defending vaccines in the so-called “Vaccine Court.” In a stunning about-face, he testified that vaccines can cause autism in children with pre-existing mitochondrial dysfunction, and that he had communicated this to DOJ lawyers in 2007.

O
ther neurologists have observed the same link. Zimmerman himself claims that there was a cover-up.  Yet, Hotez never directly addressed Zimmerman’s affidavit, or mentioned mitochondrial dysfunction or its relationship to autism and vaccines.

Instead, he repeated his version of “the Party is always right,” trotted out links to vaccine industry “astroturf” blogs, and presented irrelevant and flawed studies (this one actually gave the same vaccine/thimerosal dosage to both cases and controls, while this one was shown to be in error, and this one is debunked here ), none of which address the possibility of mitochondrial dysfunction.

As a scientist, Hotez should know that there’s no such thing as a “study showing there’s no link” to anything. A study may fail to show a link, but that doesn’t mean there’s no link. Surely we learned this from the tobacco industry’s “studies.”

Yet that’s exactly what Hotez did, claiming “clinical studies with over one million children enrolled, showing there’s no link between vaccines and autism,” [bolding mine] linking only a single, severely-flawed meta-analysis (with no children enrolled) of older studies that looked at either one ingredient (thimerosal) or one vaccine (MMR) 

The conclusion of that meta-analysis is based in part on studies rejected by the Institute of Medicine  as too flawed to be considered for their 2012 report on the vaccines/autism link.  Regardless, none of those studies considered the possibility of mitochondrial dysfunction.

Despite Hotez’s reference to “at least 99 autism genes,” no specific genes are known to cause autism.  In fact, the study he linked does not identify genes that cause autism, but merely notes some frequency of some de novo variants among some individuals with autism.

Dr. Hotez seems to forget that correlation does not equal causation.

He seems also to forget — or ignore — the fact that it has never been assessed whether vaccines, like some medications, may actually play a role in triggering genetic mutation. In fact, the package insert for every vaccine on the market clearly states“____ [this vaccine] has not been assessed for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or impairment of fertility,” or similar wording.

Hotez presents his book Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism as though the experience of one child can somehow refute reported experiences of thousands of others — children he never examined, whose medical records he never obtained, but whose parents he labels as “anti-vaccine.”


The use of pejoratives is disappointing even when wielded by preteens.  Thank heavens the Toyota and Ford companies didn’t call their critics “anti-accelerator” when their cars had problems, sometimes fatal, with stuck accelerators; after a period of insisting there wasn’t a problem (and blaming the drivers), they  issued recalls. They didn’t resort to name-calling.

But Hotez frequently does, even on Twitter.  It’s shockingly bad behavior for a scientist to label parents for wanting to discuss their own children’s potential susceptibilities, or even for refusing vaccines.

The right to decline an unwanted medical intervention, free from coercion, is, in fact, codified in Article 6 (Consent) of UNESCO’s 2005 Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights:

Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. (bolding mine)


Please note section 3 of the same Article, which protects us all from the Orwellian principles Hotez seems to be espousing:

In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent. 

We should all be troubled by scientists, doctors, or any industry insider so enraged by our reluctance to buy what they’re selling, they try to censor all conversation that disagrees with their sales pitch.

That’s not science, it’s not good medicine, and it’s deceptive.

Alison Fujito is a violinist with the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra and a volunteer member of Pennsylvania Coalition for Informed Consent

(VIDEO) Dept. of Justice says it cannot be ready for scheduled oral arguments in Attkisson computer intrusion case

UPDATE in Attkisson v. DOJ/FBI in government computer intrusion lawsuit

Saved in America: how Mexican-based drug trafficking has led to a horrifying human sex trade in US

An eye-opening look at the startling scope of Human Trafficking right here in the US. It’s on the rise. Young girls are groomed and lured by drug cartel-connected thugs then sold as a product to be owned. Experts say it’s happening in every state— even in quiet towns where you wouldn’t expect it. That’s where an eclectic group of former police and Navy SEALS comes in.

Sharyl Attkisson: We’re in southern California with a team of operators searching for a missing teenager named Cecelia.

Sean Murphy: So, we've got some intelligence that, two houses that she's been floating back and forth from through the social media. So, we're just going to go out and a set up on the house and hopefully we'll get an eyeball on her at the house.

Sharyl: Sean Murphy is a retired police lieutenant who’s on the case.

Sharyl: Is there fear that she could be falling into a trafficking situation?

Murphy: There's always that fear. There’s some red flags with this one. One of the contacts is a 30-year-old male. Yeah—enough said about that. And she’s what, 14?

Sharyl: Other Saved in America crew members are planted outside a group home for troubled girls. Ever since they discovered traffickers and gang members stalking the home for victims, they set up camp.

Watch the rest of the Full Measure investigation here:

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/saved-in-america-11-26-2018

Has Spying Compromised the Separation of Powers and Liberty?

by Mark Fitzgibbons

Founding Father James Madison informs us in “Federalist 51” that the separation of powers “to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty.” The checks and balances intended by having three branches of government, and the federalism dichotomy between a national government and the states, were brilliant developments in protecting liberty by compartmentalizing governing powers.

Most Americans can easily identify the three branches of government. Three principals, however, actually wield power under the Constitution: the federal government, states, and We the People. Only the first two of those principals are directly regulated by the Constitution, which our fourth chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall, described in a separation of powers case as our “fundamental and paramount law.”

Continue reading the commentary at the link below:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/has-spying-compromised-the-separation-of-powers-and-liberty_2762718.html

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Coming Soon

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Follow Sharyl Attkisson

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Recent Comments

  • Mickey Pullen on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Mike Marinak on Hydroxychloroquine: Politicizing Medicine (PODCAST)
  • Debunking “The Hotchkiss Republicans Report” - The Hotchkiss Record on "Collusion against Trump" timeline

Subscribe

Get the Latest Stories Straight to Your Inbox

Footer

Pages

  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Support
  • Contact

2ndary Pages

  • Full Measure Stations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Subscribe to SharylAttkisson.com

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS

  • Attkisson v. DOJ/FBI
  • Benghazi
  • Fake News
  • Fast & Furious
  • Obamacare

Ad

Ad