One of the unfortunate thing about Sharyl Attkisson is she was gaslighted so badly,

* * *
Totally agree on both points.
Snopes isn’t bad on the non-political stuff, and at least they do give provenance for rumors, even if their “analysis” sometimes stretches the facts to fit the ideology.

Could she have been hacked again? I’ll never forget her description of seeing her CBS computer at home turn on by itself, as the Government spies remotely ransacked it.

One of the unfortunate thing about Sharyl Attkisson is she was gaslighted so badly, the lefties have her painted so thoroughly as a nut job, that it doesn’t work to cite her work to argue with them. What was done to her was appalling. Whoever “they” are specifically, they made it so no one on the left gives her work any creedence.

And she does some serious digging and research that few others do.

In the aftermath of Jonathan Gruber’s impassioned, heart-felt admissions:
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/223578-obamacare-architect-lack-of-transparency-helped-law-pass

and:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G790p0LcgbI

the NYT chimes in with:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/18/opinion/the-impolitic-jonathan-gruber.html

Fact-checking at its very best!

…Followed by Obama’s honest-to-goodness:
https://www.inquisitr.com/1618424/gruber-visited-white-house-21-times-president-obama-claims-he-does-not-know-the-obamacare-architect/

But nothing new there: Gruber just got the “Jeremiah Wright..but I didn’t know…” treatment (“Obama said that he did not know the extent of Rev. Wright’s controversial comments until recently…” from
https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452990&page=1 )

Merely the “audacity of hope” that no one in the MSM would bother to point out the absurdities. And Obama was certainly right about that.

Along with all those other times that Obama found out about something or other just by “reading it in the media”…. (Well, sure, just a regular guy…)

“Audacity of hope”?
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/the-reverend-wright-affair/

Kind of ties in with this article’s completely credulous acceptance of the said fact-checking liars:

https://www.axios.com/trump-effect-92-percent-republicans-media-fake-news-9c1bbf70-0054-41dd-b506-0869bb10f08c.html

“When it comes to vetting news sources, roughly half of both parties say they, “stick to news sources they trust.” However, Democrats are more likely to take additional steps to verify what they’ve read than Republicans, according to survey responses.

More than half of Democrats (57%) say they use Google search to verify facts compared to 48% of Republicans and 55% of independents.
Nearly half of Democrats (43%) say they use a fact-checking website (e.g. FactCheck.org or Snopes.com) to verify facts compared to 30% of Republicans and 29% of independents.
Nearly half of Democrats (44%) say they check a website URL to verify its validity compared to 29% of Republicans and 36% of independents.”

I’m okay with the last one, although I have no idea what the process would be, but — Google, FactCheck.Org, and Snopes are touted as being used to verify politically-charged facts — really?
There’s a good reason Republicans and Independents don’t use them, and Democrats do.

She could have made it Top 40. 🙂

Another is Salena Zito, although she is primarily op ed rather than pure reportage.