News

Vaccines and autism?

For years, the government, medical establishment and vaccine industry have insisted that any science linking vaccines to autism is not to be believed.

But what if the government's own pro-vaccine medical expert, who helped defend vaccines in federal vaccine court, privately told the government that vaccines can cause autism, after all? And what if the government not only covered that up but went on to misrepresent his opinion to debunk vaccine-autism lawsuits?

That's the allegation from a world renowned pro-vaccine pediatric neurologist and we dig into the controversy Sunday in a story you'll only see on Full Measure.

We'll also have a story on improving the polls. How will the industry improve for 2020 so that polling is viewed as more accurate? An expert fills us in.

And next time you pour delicious maple syrup on your pancakes, we'll give you something to think about: Canada's maple syrup cartel. Joce Sterman has that story.

See you Sunday for more Original Reporting! Station times at the link below.

Media mistake: Brazil's First Lady wasn't "saluting"-- she was using sign language.

Below are some of the photos the press could have used showing Brazil's First Lady giving her first speech in sign language. Instead, Associated Press distributed the first photo with the incorrect caption stating she was "giving a military salute," which the Washington Post featured (first photo below). Later, the Washington Post issued a correction (bottom image).

Beyond the question of how they could make such a sloppy journalism error is the question of how hard they had to work to find such an unflattering photo. The photos included below are more reflective of the actual event, which you can see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEVJR9Z0pLI

"URGENT" dispatch to CBS after the computer intrusions forensically confirmed

The following is the 16th in a series of excerpts from my New York Times bestseller “Stonewalled,” which recounts the government intrusions of my computers. More excerpts to follow. Links to previous excerpts are below.

To me, the pieces are starting to fit together. My case and that of AP and FOX are enough to suggest that the government had a coordi- nated effort at least by 2012, and probably beginning earlier, to target the leakers and reporters who were perceived as making the adminis- tration’s life difficult. Snowden’s revelations tie it all together.

If CBS is blind to the connection, it’s nonetheless occurred to some members of Congress and their staff. A number of them in the House and Senate approach me and ask if they can help me in the effort to hold the perpetrators in my case accountable. For the moment, I’m looking for answers in a way that keeps the conversation out of the spotlight.

CBS finally agrees to provide me a copy of Patel’s draft report. I’ve had further conversations that lead me to conclude my company may try to spin my computer intrusions as something dubious and indefinite. I’m given additional pause for thought when I learn that some CBS managers are quietly implying to selected colleagues, who are happy to spread it around, that the computer intrusions might be a figment of my “paranoid” imagination. I can’t figure out why they would say such a thing when their own analyst had long ago confirmed the intrusions verbally and in writing, in no uncertain terms. Why would some in my own company now attempt to discredit the computer issue and their own forensic expert? Weren’t they as alarmed as I was to learn that unauthorized parties were in the CBS system?

As if enough weren’t going on, this all was happening against the backdrop of my trying to separate myself from CBS contractually for reasons discussed elsewhere in this book—an effort that would end with my agreeing to remain on staff for about another year. But the discussions caused a great deal of stress and tension between me and some of my bosses.

Even more disturbing, word came to me that a CBS manager had convened a private meeting with a colleague asking him to turn over the name(s) of the inside confidential source(s) who had first helped me identify the computer intrusions back in January. The colleague didn’t have that information.

Weird.

Although I’ve pretty much been frozen out of the investigation into my own computer intrusions at this point, I don’t give up until I finally reach Patel personally on the phone and ask him what’s going on. He says he’s preparing his final report. I tell him that I’m getting the feel- ing that some at CBS might try to bury the computer intrusion.

“That’s impossible,” he tells me. “They can’t deny it happened. The facts are clear.” And he tells me that he’s wrapping up his inves- tigation.

While preparing his final report for CBS on June 10, 2013, Patel makes an additional breakthrough and sends a direct message that will make it impossible for anyone to legitimately soft-pedal my computer intrusions. He writes an email to CBS managers marked “URGENT” and states that his analysis using a special investigative tool has revealed definitive evidence of one or more invaders attempting to remotely run commands on my computer. Additionally, he explicitly makes clear there’s proof that the entity deliberately removed evidence of its handi- work. Tried to cover up its tracks during that mid-December time frame in which I had noticed that the frenetic nights of computer activity had slipped into quiet slumber. The infiltrator ran commands that nobody should have run. It collected my passwords and contacts with a special program. It securely erased entries and histories of certain commands. Other clues left behind: the cyber-spies changed the internal clock of my work laptop not once, not twice, but 1,358 times, possibly in an attempt to disrupt any temporal analysis we might try to do. If this had been a legal tap, they wouldn’t have needed to tamper with the evidence.

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 [hr]

Anti-Sanctuary Cities

When I went to one US border town run by Democrats, I asked for their thoughts and opinions... and was surprised by what they said.

Watch the full Full Measure investigation below.

My computer intrusion and the national connection

The following is the 15th in a series of excerpts from my New York Times bestseller “Stonewalled,” which recounts the government intrusions of my computers. More excerpts to follow. Links to previous excerpts are below.

Snowden reveals how the NSA has obtained direct access to the systems of all the trusted Internet giants that Americans commonly use, such as Google, Apple, and Facebook, as part of a program called Prism. Through Prism, government officials can collect the search

histories, emails, file transfers, and live chats of ordinary, law-abiding citizens. The depth and breadth of the surveillance is mindboggling. The implied privacy violations and government overreach confound normal alliances. Some Democrats strongly question the initiatives. Many Republicans defend it.

Drip, drip becomes gush, gush, gush as a rolling wave of Snowden revelations washes up one sensitive and embarrassing government secret after another. Like the government’s controversial April 2013 order from the clandestine Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. The order compelled Verizon to provide the NSA, on an ongoing basis, all of its call detail records, or “telephony meta- data.” Not only for calls that go abroad, but also for ones that take place wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls. The initiative is supposedly to protect us from foreign terrorist threats. But casting the net so widely—even applying to next-door neighbors calling one another here in the U.S.A.—arouses shock and outrage. The authority was first granted in 2001 under the PATRIOT Act. As Congress debated renewal of the act in 2011, two Democrats, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, foreshadowed the controversy to come. Both members of the Intelligence Committee, which oversees the intelligence com- munity, the senators were privy to the surreptitious ways in which the government was granting itself and expanding authority. And pushing the bounds of the definition of “metadata”—which refers to impersonal data about data—to include more information, and compiling it in such a way that it can reveal personal details that were intended to be protected.

“I want to deliver a warning,” Wyden stated during the 2011 con- gressional debate over renewal of the PATRIOT Act: “when the Amer- ican people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the PATRIOT Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry.”

Wyden’s words sound much like those of my sources the previous fall.

The average American would be shocked at the extent to which this administration is spying on its own private citizens.

Patel continues his examination of my computers but it seems to stall and languish. Weeks. Months. CBS managers are conspicuously silent on the issue of a possible connection between what’s happened to me and what we’re learning about the government’s overreach through the cases of AP, FOX, and Snowden. As if it hasn’t occurred to them. As if they’re not even a little outraged—or at least curious. In fact, they seem extremely uncomfortable with the fact that I’ve discovered unauthorized trespassers in my computers. I can’t explain it, but I’m now getting a vibe from CBS as if I’m the one who’s done something wrong for learning that my computers were infiltrated.

The strange vibe persists when I seek out an update on Patel’s com- puter forensics work. I find myself suddenly cut out of the loop. The computer firm had been communicating directly with me. But now, they won’t readily respond to phone calls and emails. It’s as if they’ve been instructed to slice me out of the communications channel. As I continue to press to find out what has become of the investigation, I eventually learn secondhand that Patel provided CBS a near-final draft report on May 9, but CBS hasn’t provided me with a copy or even told me that the report has been sent. I can’t explain why, other than intuition, but I get the eerie feeling that CBS wants to downplay what’s happened—maybe even try to advance a narrative that there was no computer intrusion. Why am I not in the loop on the findings of incidents that happened to me in my home?

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

[hr]

Saved in America

A look at human trafficking in the U.S.

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.

Click the link below for the investigative report on Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson.

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

An auld lang syne review of The Worst Predictions About Trump

As we prepare to enter a third year with Donald Trump as president, he can brag of many accomplishments, such as record employment for blacks, Asian-Americans and Hispanics; replacing NAFTA; tax cuts; two Supreme Court justices; deep-sixing the Iran agreement; and moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Like commanders-in-chief before him, Trump also has had to leave a lot of promises by the wayside. He didn’t “lock her up.” He hasn’t yet built a border wall that Mexico paid for. He didn’t install extreme vetting for visitors from high-terrorism, mostly Muslim-majority nations. And he abandoned his promise to launch a vaccine safety commission that would have defied the wishes of the rich and powerful pharmaceutical industry.

As we look ahead to Year Three of the Trump presidency, there are countless predictions about what lies ahead. Will he be impeached, enjoy huge success, or serve a second term? (Or all of the above?)

One thing we know for sure is that we can’t tell the future by relying on those who have made outlandishly bad predictions in the past. So before we become engulfed by the inevitable discussions and debates about what’s going to happen in 2019 and beyond, here’s an auld lang syne walk down memory lane, looking at 11 of the most wildly inaccurate predictions involving Donald Trump’s candidacy and presidency.

Click the link below to read the rest of the article...

Read the rest of the article here in The Hill

The Government Computer Intrusions: Word Spreads

The following is the 14th in a series of excerpts from my New York Times bestseller “Stonewalled,” which recounts the government intrusions of my computers. More excerpts to follow. Links to previous excerpts are below.

I haven’t named the Justice Department as a culprit or suspect. But considering the AP and FOX News incidents, it’s only natural that someone else in the media would ask the Justice Department to comment on the Attkisson case.

In response, the agency issues this statement: “To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never ‘compromised’ Ms. Attkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer, or other media device she may own or use.”

As someone who’s now an old hand at the way the administration parses words, my brain automatically shifts into read-between-the- lines mode.

To our knowledge . . . says the Justice Department’s quasi-denial. Okay, that’s a qualifier. Leaves open a little room. And who is “our” referring to in “To our knowledge”? Does it mean the guy who wrote the statement and another who pressed the send button? The whole press office? The entire Justice Department? Did officials there really, in the blink of an eye, conduct an investigation and question 113,543 Justice Department employees? That’s impressive! I’m still waiting for answers to Freedom of Information Act requests I filed with them years ago, but they’re able to provide this semi-definitive statement within minutes of the question being posed.

Oddly enough, most of my colleagues have been avoiding the whole topic of my computer intrusions. It seems they don’t want to think about it or talk about it or know about it. As if it’s somehow contagious. I haven’t offered up much information, but several of them are aware that the CBS analyst has confirmed my intrusion. Yet the natural curiosity you might expect from fellow journalists, the outcry, seems strangely absent. If the shoe were on the other foot, I’d be outraged that anyone had illegally entered the CBS computer system. If I were them I’d want to find out as much as possible to see if the same thing might be happening to me, potentially compromising my story information and sources.

I’d wonder if the infiltrators had peered in my home computer, too, and if they’d rifled through my private files. The new revelations about AP and FOX seem to trigger the first spark of interest from some colleagues.

“Is this what’s happening to you?” one of them dares to ask.

Another ventures a little deeper.

“How does it make you feel to know the administration is going after you like that?

I think for a moment.

“Effective.”

They don’t want to linger on the topic. They broach it, ask a ques-

tion, make a joke, and move on. Like a butterfly lighting for a moment and then, thinking better of it, fluttering off.

| SNOWDEN AND CLAPPER: HARD TRUTHS

It’s hard to imagine there are more shoes to drop. But the next one is a bona fide rubber-soled size 14 extra wide. So large and damaging, it stands to undermine the credibility of the nation’s entire intelligence infrastructure.

On Wednesday, June 5, 2013, the Washington Post and the Guard- ian begin exposés that vault an unknown National Security Agency (NSA) contract employee named Edward Snowden into cult status as an American Patriot, Public Enemy #1, or both, depending on your viewpoint. Snowden’s information reveals a shocking government effort to watch over, or spy on, its own citizens—depending on your viewpoint.

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”