Quotes from Sharyl Attkisson

Sometimes I rub people the wrong way, although I'm very polite.

If you've read my New York Times bestseller 'Stonewalled', you know that I'm a fan of an intellectual exercise I call the Substitution Game. It involves comparing how the press treats similar events or people depending on how the reporter or news organization feels about the issue or the newsmaker.

As reporters set aside their traditional role as fact seekers and veer into advocacy, they find themselves on a slippery journalistic slope.

I'm not a liberal or conservative journalist, I'm saying conservative-owned media corporations seem to be treated differently.

I started working as a journalist under Bush, then Clinton, then Bush, then Obama.

My own view is that only under very limited circumstances, and on a case-by-case basis, should we make advance policy decisions to artificially minimize information or censor it from the public's view.

I feel pretty safe in saying that most Americans can't tell you off the top of their head who the Kurds are or what the U.S. relationship with them is - let alone how that factors into Iran, Russia, China, Turkey and Syria.

The rules seem rigged to protect government lawlessness, and the playing field is uneven.

Following sporadic reports of intelligence officials misleading Congress about surveilling U.S. citizens - even spying on journalists and political figures and their staffs - there was a series of red flags in 2016 and 2017 that should have drawn attention and action.

Even amid the heated political rhetoric that dominates the news media and social media, resurrected false claims about the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., stand out as egregious.

From what I can tell, pollsters are generally fairly stick-to-the-facts folks. They deal in facts and statistics.

My court fight is clearly an uphill battle. The Department of Justice has unlimited tax dollars to spend obstructing and fighting my case, which is now in its fourth year.

News organizations would best serve the public by sticking to the facts and the news. Speculation should be minimized.

In fact, by Democrats pursuing the strategy of attacking everything President Trump does as the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it stuff, their criticism has just become white noise to many Americans.

My prediction for the 2016 race was based on a variety of observational and anecdotal evidence. I listened to Democrats, Republicans and independents across the U.S. I talked to people who consider themselves apolitical.

Ever since his inauguration, President Trump's political opponents have been pushing to impeach him. They just hadn't found the right excuse. In other words, they knew where they wanted to end up but they just hadn't found the right vehicle to drive them down the road.

I'm not a professional political analyst, so my political analysis is worth about what you pay for it.

The beauty of American elections is that anything can happen.

There's a tendency in the news media, on the part of some managers, to censor or block stories that don't fall in line with the message they want sent to the viewers.

When analysis and opinion are invited, various viewpoints should be represented. Allegations of political blame, when they occur, should be reasonably challenged on all sides, as good journalism requires.

In general, hateful speech and opinions are protected under the Constitution, except to the extent they are deemed to incite violence or otherwise become illegal. But, at the same time, civilized society tends to frown upon it.

I gave up a long time ago thinking that people had to like or agree with what I was doing.