Crowd Sourcing Surveillance Information

Sharyl Attkisson has turned to crowd sourcing to find the culprits. Nothing like getting that big, cold wall from the government when private citizens want justice.

$50,000 Whistleblower Award Offered in Unlawful Government Surveillance Case

May 30, 2019 by Sharyl Attkisson | Sharyl Attkinson

Reward: Up to $50,000

Many of you are familiar with the forensically-proven Government spying on me and my family. It’s one of multiple documented surveillance abuses by our Government.

Unfortunately, the Department of Justice refuses to act on the forensic evidence, investigate its own, and punish those responsible. The only option left for ordinary citizens who are targeted for abuse is to self-fund a fight for justice in court. I’m now in year four of my fight.

Even here, the battle is daunting. The Government holds the evidence, the Government uses our tax money to withhold the evidence, then the courts declare the case cannot go forward because we cannot list the exact names of the federal agents responsible— names which only the Government knows.

Today, we are announcing a substantial monetary reward, up to $50,000.00, for anyone providing information that helps us identify names of those responsible for the Government surveillance operation against me. * …./

See: https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/05/50000-whistleblower-award-offered/

It’s a shame it comes to this and seems that this is what it takes, if anything can reveal it. Funny how you never hear squat from Libs about this case. Actually, they criticize her as if it were her doing, or she is to blame. Or they deny it completely. But it happened and, as the story goes, if it can happen to her it can certainly happen to anyone.

Pin the Tail on Elites and Mefia

That’s not a typo, its what happens when media acts like organized mafia.

Sharyl Attkisson: Media Distorting Facts to Serve World Elites at Levels Never Seen Before

by Dan Riehl  17 Jun 2016 |  Breitbart 

Sharyl Attkisson talked to Breitbart News Daily SiriusXM host Matt Boyle Friday about her new show, Full Measure with Sheryl Attkisson, as well as current events and an extremely disturbing trend. Elites have become adept at controlling media narratives, going so far as to ostracize reporters who “veer” from a particular narrative: “It’s certainly happening here in the United States,” said Attkisson.

Asked if American media appear to be aggressively pushing a particular narrative, specifically gun control in light of the recent terrorism in Orlando, Attkisson said:

I think they’ve been pushing narratives a lot for the last couple of years in a way I haven’t seen five years ago … ten years ago, for sure. It’s almost like someone’s given a license at the top. It used to be done kind of subtly, but now it’s sort of encouraged. It’s almost as if everybody’s on the same page now. I think it’s inappropriate. I think that different views should be represented. It doesn’t have to be 50-50 every time that every story has to be given equal time. But over time, different views should be heard, and we just don’t hear that anymore.

“I just got back from a conference in Russia, of all places, where global journalists gathered to talk about this as a trend globally, where government interests, corporate interests, special interests have learned how to use the news media,”Attkisson said, “how to use social media to control the narrative in ways, I think, more aggressively than has ever been done before.”

As for reporters, she asserted:

When they veer from the narrative that’s trying to be established by whatever power that exists, they’re controversialized, they’re bullied, they’re driven out of the mainstream. It’s a global trend. Whoever is trying to control the narrative has figured this out. They’re applying similar techniques around the world, and it’s certainly happening here in the United States.

Concerning public safety, Attkisson recently reported on Full Measure that Cleveland appears to be completely unprepared to host the upcoming GOP convention: “The head of policing said they’re not prepared; they haven’t been trained.”

She continued:

There is a complete disconnect between what the city official said is the preparation level and what the police said is the preparation level, and the head of the police unit said he’s worried his guys are going to get hurt, and they don’t have the equipment they expect. They fully think they’re going to be inundated with violent protesters because that’s what’s happened at other Trump events. So there’s concern there.

The full list of Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson shows can be found here. “There is fascinating stuff there you will not see on any other program,” said Attkisson.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

Spies like them

Ex-CBS reporter: Government agency bugged my computer

By Kyle Smith and Bruce Golding | NY Post

October 27, 2014

A former CBS News reporter who quit the network over claims it kills stories that put President Obama in a bad light says she was spied on by a “government-related entity” that planted classified documents on her computer.

In her new memoir, Sharyl Attkisson says a source who arranged to have her laptop checked for spyware in 2013 was “shocked” and “flabbergasted” at what the analysis revealed.

“This is outrageous. Worse than anything Nixon ever did. I wouldn’t have believed something like this could happen in the United States of America,” Attkisson quotes the source saying.

She speculates that the motive was to lay the groundwork for possible charges against her or her sources.

Attkisson says the source, who’s “connected to government three-letter agencies,” told her the computer was hacked into by “a sophisticated entity that used commercial, nonattributable spyware that’s proprietary to a government agency: either the CIA, FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency or the National Security Agency.” […/]

More NY Post

For someone they wanted to fire, she seemed to be very popular.

PS: I repeat my line, at least Nixon resigned.

Gosnell move over, we’re from the government…

Full Disclosure: Did Government’s Experiment on Preemies Hide Risks?

Sharyl Attkisson / @SharylAttkisson / June 03, 2014

 

Just 25 weeks into her pregnancy, Sharrissa Cook gave birth to a critically ill baby boy. Dreshan weighed in at a fragile 1 pound, 11 ounces. He lay motionless in the incubator, connected to tubes and monitors in the neonatal intensive care unit at the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hospital.

“He was so tiny,” Cook recalls. “I was a first-time mom. I didn’t have a clue. I didn’t know what to expect.”

It was Oct. 11, 2006. Medical personnel asked Cook, then a 26-year-old single mother, to enroll little Dreshan in a study. She says they described it as a program offering assistance and encouragement to preemies—premature babies—and their families. She readily signed the consent form.

“I remember them telling me they were a support group who would pretty much hold my hand through the developmental process,” Cook says.

But in reality, the study was much more than that. It was a national, government-funded experiment on 1,316 extremely premature infants in which their fate may as well have rested with the flip of a coin.

Other single moms who were among those persuaded to sign up their critically ill babies at the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hospital describe similar misunderstandings of the study’s purpose.

Bernita Lewis, then a 22-year-old student, says she enrolled her premature newborn, Christian, after medical personnel told her it simply was to gather data such as weight and height.

And Survonda Banks, then 21, unemployed and on public assistance, says someone handed her the consent form on her way in for an emergency C-section at 28 weeks of pregnancy. Banks remembers being told only that it was a way to help her baby, Destiny.

‘Parents Were Misled’

The government-backed study is called SUPPORT, which stands for “Surfactant, Positive Airway Pressure, and Pulse Oximetry Randomized Trial.” The experiment was conducted at 23 academic institutions from 2005 through 2009 under the National Institutes of Health, part of the Department of Health and Human Services.

All three women now say they never would have agreed to take part if they had known the NIH-funded study’s true nature—to randomly manipulate preemie oxygen levels. They discovered that just last year.

Dreshan and Christian are now 7 years old and both struggle with myriad health problems. Destiny died within three weeks. The mothers wonder: Did the experiment contribute to any of the medical problems of their children?

“[Dreshan] was already at a slim chance of surviving; why would I make his chances of surviving more slim?” Cook asks.

The NIH-funded experiment used the test babies in an attempt to find the sweet spot for preemies yet to be born: the lowest level of oxygen that would preserve vision, yet be sufficient to prevent brain damage and death.

To get the answer, researchers arbitrarily assigned infants to either a high-oxygen or low-oxygen group.

Playing Russian roulette’

In some instances, the results proved both disturbing and tragic.

More of the high-oxygen babies ended up with serious vision disorders. The low-oxygen preemies were more likely to die. The results, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in May 2010, sparked ethical questions and complaints. Companion studies being conducted in other countries were halted.

Read full article: http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/03/uninformed-consent-nih-sacrifice-preemies-sake-research/

Part 2: Full Disclosure: ‘Input’ Stalls Agency’s Ethics Probe in Baby Oxygen Trials

Pressure from government officials and eminent researchers appears to have pushed a federal agency to postpone enforcement action on violations it found in a government-financed experiment on extremely premature babies.

The agency, which polices ethics in health studies, says the controversy over the study of preemies highlights a “fundamental difference between the obligations of clinicians and those of researchers.”

That ethics body, called the Office for Human Research Protections, is part of the Department of Health and Human Services. The sponsor of the controversial experiment, the National Institutes of Health, is also part of HHS. Officials at both HHS and NIH provided “input” leading to the office’s delay in enforcement.

Gov vs. Gov

The entire dispute might be little more than an academic debate if it weren’t for one crucial factor: The Office for Human Research Protections, the ethics body within HHS, ruled that the consent process for the study violated federal regulations designed to protect human research subjects.

Part 3: Full Disclosure: Parents Fault Medical Research Study for Putting Preemies in Harm’s Way

Thanks to Just Gene, H/T for the article.
“HE’S BAAAAAAAAAAK, THIS TIME AS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT”