by Jon Rappoport

November 13, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

An email sent to one person from a significant member of the YES ON 37 campaign thinks I’m getting in the way.

“I find John’s [sic] article to be disrupting to the healing that has to take place.” That’s the quote.

Healing? You’re kidding, right?

Whose healing? The staff of the YES ON 37 campaign? The people of California, who won’t be able to tell whether the food they’re eating is genetically modified?

Does this healing involve whiskey, ice cream, yoga, campfires, moonshine, grief counselors, walks on the beach?

Much more importantly, this YES ON 37 leader writes:

“The reports of voter fraud are, to date, urban/internet legends created by folks who don’t understand the system.”

Really? What is the system?

To enlighten us, the author of this email offers a link to the California Secretary of State’s website, where we learn that vote counts always continue long after election night.

Well, of course they do. I never disputed that. However, the Secretary of State’s general statement refers to “hundreds of thousands of votes” that, typically, have to be counted after election Tuesday.

The actual figure, as of 11/13/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, is 2.3 million uncounted votes.

That’s quite different than “hundreds of thousands of [uncounted] votes”.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

As of 11/13/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, the unprocessed vote count stands at 2,304,250:

Prop 37 has not yet been defeated.

So excuse me if I’m interrupting the healing, but the fight isn’t over yet.

Furthermore, anyone who cares to investigate “the system” can see that the opportunities for vote-fraud are everywhere. It’s not an urban legend. For starters, go to blackboxvoting and read everything you can find.

Here’s a clue. The “experts” who are advising YES ON 37 make their living by accepting all vote-counts as real and honest and correct.

Otherwise, they couldn’t make wise predictions. They couldn’t make a living. These “experts” have to believe in the system and support it. When it comes to multiple avenues of fraud, they’re lost. They’re in the dark. So they have to pooh-pooh the possibility of fraud. Get it?

I’d really like to meet the experts who are advising YES ON 37. I really would. Here’s a thought. I’ll bring my vote-fraud researchers to the party, and we can have a debate. I know a great radio show that has about 700,000 listeners. We can lay it all out. Fraud vs. no-fraud. Let’s get it on the table. Feel free to accept my invitation.

This email correspondence from a YES ON 37 leader goes on: “I think it’s time for us to acknowledge that we did not get the votes we hoped to due to a lack of funding and ability to get the word out. We need to accept it, move through all the stages if [of] grief and then turn that anger into more action. We are regrouping and not stopping.”

Stages of grief? Was I just rocketed into an Elisabeth Kubler-Ross seminar?

How about the stages of challenging the forces of evil?

This is not over. The absurdly early call against Prop 37 on election night was a fraud. At the time it was made, there were perhaps six million votes uncounted. Maybe more.

And given who is behind NO ON 37—corporations who want to own the food supply of the planet—why should we assume the past, present, and future votes in this campaign are true and honestly recorded?

Disruptive is exactly what we need to be.

And when the count is finished, in several weeks, a recount must be done. To guarantee we’ll get an honest number? No. To provide a chance (maybe) to spot a piece of fraud that could lead to another piece of fraud. And to cause a good piece of trouble. To stir the pot. To see what rises to the surface.

Here is another quote from the YES ON 37 email: “…do you really think that if we thought fraud was going on, we would not investigate it?”

YES ON 37 obviously does not think there is vote fraud here, but they should.

Many, many elections are called early by the television networks. YES ON 37 isn’t the only one. But that doesn’t mean those calls are honest. That doesn’t mean we should lie down and take it.

On election night, shortly after the polls closed in the state of Washington, the networks started making early calls on various winners. But in that state, no one goes to the polls and votes in-person anymore. All votes are sent in by mail. To qualify, they must be postmarked no later than election day. So how the hell did a network make an early projection about anything?

There is rampant fraud in America’s election system. Prop 37 is an example. A week ago, media outlets sent 37 crashing down to defeat with their projections. Yet, days later, there are still 3.3 million votes uncounted. Does that make sense? Does that lead us to feel warm and comfortable about the votes that have already been counted?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but on election night, after the polls closed in California, the networks began to report very big leads for NO ON 37. Boom, right out of the gate. Where did those votes come from? We need to know. Were they absentee ballots? If so, had they been sent in from overseas? Were they, yes, ghost votes that just jumped up on machines out of nowhere?

Because as the night continued, YES ON 37 started catching up. Bit by bit, that big lead eroded. And then, when YES ON 37 was at 47%, bang, it was over. The networks called the race against Prop 37.

YES ON 37 is obviously relying on someone to give them expert advice on the vote-count, and whoever that is, he/she has told them they’re toast.

In a previous article, I reported on another email sent out by a YES ON 37 worker. It stated that the fight was over because, get this, the votes that were still uncounted were “early votes” that most probably had been cast when the NO ON 37 forces were swinging into gear with their negative ads. Therefore, those early as-yet uncounted votes had probably succumbed to the NO ON 37 propaganda.

Man, if that is expert advice, an ant is piloting a rocket ship to Mars.

The Organic Consumer’s Association has just released a statement that they are monitoring the vote-count and may choose to challenge it when it’s done.

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2012/11/12

I urge them to not to accept the numbers we’ve been given so far. Don’t simply take what the state of California feeds us as the current count or the final count.

I’ve said this time after time, but some people just don’t get it. I guess they haven’t gone through the stages of understanding, which are: wake up; wake up; wake up; wake up.

Do NOT assume the Prop 37 vote-count so far is true. The problem is more than the uncounted votes. It’s all the votes. It’s the votes that have already been reported, the votes that are being counted now, and the votes that will be counted.

People have been told that “election observers from both sides” guarantee the vote-count is honest. That’s nonsense. When fraud is done electronically, observers see nothing. There is nothing to see.

People have also been told that, with the current difference between the YES votes on 37 and the NO votes, YES can’t possibly win. Counting the rest of the votes won’t swing the election over to YES. But you see, that assumes the current difference is true and factual. It assumes that YES ON 37 is currently trailing by about 600,000 votes. Don’t accept that. Don’t assume that’s true.

I can’t believe the naivete of some people. They’re stepping into a lion’s den where the lions are corporations like Monsanto, who would do anything to win an election, and yet these fantasists assume “the system is working.”

“Oh, yes, the vote-count is honest. Of course it’s honest. We fought the good fight and we lost. We have to grieve and move on and regroup and mount another campaign. We lost the vote. Just look at the reported numbers. There’s no way we can win. We played fair, everybody played fair, and we went down to defeat.”

Do you think this is a picnic and a game of softball in the park? Do you think everybody is nice and nicer and nicest and plays by the rules?

“Yes, we entered the system to do battle against the most evil force on the planet. In this sacred system, we played fair. And so did they. You see, they are evil every day in every way, but when they get into an election, they are magically transformed. It’s wonderful. They are suddenly honorable. And they won, fair and square. We lost. It was a beautiful thing. The system worked. This is America. It may have its flaws, but it’s the best system ever devised in the history of the world. I learned that in fifth grade. Bush didn’t cheat when he ran against Gore. Bush didn’t cheat when he ran against Kerry. That was just a fairy tale. And Chicago? No one has ever cheated in a Chicago election. And the television networks, who make early projections of winners before you can even blink? They would never cheat or lie. Of course not. The media lie every day when they report the news. But on election night a little fairy descends on them and they become righteous and good. We know we’re trailing by 600,000 votes because that’s what we were told, and we always believe what we’re told. We’ve done the math, based on what we’ve been told, and so we know we’ve lost. Our experts have assured us we have no chance of winning now, in this fair and honest system.”

Over the years, I’ve met some of these experts.

“Look, see what the figures are here? You’re behind by half a million votes. Now, if you calculate the percentages on the votes still to be counted and divide by six and multiply by eight, you get half the age of my mother. Then add six and it all comes clear. Your chance of winning is less than two percent.”

To which I say: “Why should I assume I’m really behind by half a million votes? Why should I assume the count was honest.”

And he says, “Because my job and my paycheck depend on everybody believing the vote-count is real and not fake.”

Figuring out the details of a particular fraud needs pros. Real ones. Not fake ones.

YES ON 37 has apparently finished with its work on 37. The baton is passing.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

PROP 37 VOTE FRAUD UPDATE: 3.3 MILLION VOTES STILL UNCOUNTED

by Jon Rappoport

November 11, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

When the networks and other media outlets made the early call on election night, claiming Prop 37 had gone down to defeat, there were millions of votes still uncounted.

I just checked the California Secretary of State’s website, which is the official center for vote results, and there are 3,334,495 votes that remain unprocessed.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

As of 11/9/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, the unprocessed vote count stands at 3,334,495:

Reading the county-by-county reports, the last date any of them reported in with numbers was November 8, three days ago.

Why is it taking so long for California to count all its votes? Why do so many remain uncounted at this late date?

Yes, some of them are what’s called provisional votes. That basically means they were turned in with errors, and those errors need to be tracked down and corrected. That takes time.

But large numbers of uncounted votes must be electronic. What’s the hold-up?

Looking at the most recent report on the Prop 37 results, Prop 37 is trailing by 585,464 votes.

Of the 3.3 million votes that remain uncounted, how many people voted on Prop 37, one way or the other? I don’t know.

We can fiddle with estimates and projections and try to figure out how many people would have to vote YES on 37 for a victory, but—and this is very important—a larger specter looms over all this.

I really hope you get this.

When the absurdly early call against Prop 37 was made on election night, that was a clue. It was a red flag. It was a loud siren:

“Something is very wrong here.” That was the message.

From the moment that clue sprang forth, from the moment that siren went off, we had two choices. We could say, “Well, the TV networks are insane. They’re crooked. So we need to get all the votes counted, to see what the real result is.”

Or we could say: “This early call against 37 suggests more criminality. Other crimes. How can we rely on the vote count at all? How can we assume, even when the other votes are counted, we’re going to get a true result?”

The second conclusion is the correct one. This is what I’ve been saying for the past several days.

Many people naively believe that the early call against Prop 37 was the only problem. They assume the entire vote count, when it’s finished, will be true and honest.

Let’s say you’re investigating a jewel theft. And you see a guy walking down the street and he has part of a big necklace hanging out of his pocket. Do you assume the necklace is the only stolen item he’s carrying? Or do you infer the guy is loaded with other items from the theft?

Here are two sources you can consult. The first is an extensive article by Victoria Collier about general vote-count fraud. The second is the California Secretary of State’s own 2007 “Top-to-Bottom-Review” of voting machines used in elections. This report is a mind-blower. It reveals massive opportunities for vote fraud. Should we blithely assume California has fixed all those problems?

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12213-americas-media-just-made-vote-rigging-easier

http://www.sos.ca.gov/voting-systems/oversight/top-to-bottom-review.htm

Recently, a team at the Argonne National Lab showed how a voting machine could be hacked and controlled, using a small device that costs between $10-$26.

There was the famous 2010 experiment, in which a team from Ann Arbor, Michigan, offered to hack the District of Columbia’s voting system. They broke in and reversed the count in the mayoral election. They also fabricated absentee votes from overseas and canceled out the real votes.

In my second article on the Prop 37 scandal, I tracked the early media call against Prop 37, on election night, to its most probable source, the Associated Press (AP).

AP, the giant wire service, is officially a non-profit owned by 1400 member newspapers, who use its services and also contribute articles. However, as everyone knows, the newspaper business in America is dying. Its bottom line is sitting in a lake of red ink, and the lake is sitting in an ocean of red ink.

That means these newspapers, and the corporations who own them, have been re-financing their very existence with loans, and loans to pay off earlier loans. That means banks.

Now you’re getting into the oligarchy that owns this country.

Does this sound too far-fetched? Too remote? Can we really say that “the powers-that-be” defeated Prop 37?

Well, remember that YES ON 37 was a wedge against the assault of GMO food. It was the first of a number of dominoes that could fall against Monsanto and other GMO companies. Why? Because once consumers could see, labeled on the food they bought, whether it was GMO, they could make a choice.

And surveys indicate that huge numbers of people don’t want to eat GMO food or are at least suspicious of it.

Imagine what would happen if millions and millions of Americans, starting in California, rejected GMO food at the market.

Is that a threat to the mega-GMO-corporations who want to own the patents on all food crops on the planet? Is the Pope Catholic?

We also have more down-to-earth fiddling with Prop 37. An instant classic press conference was held a few days before the election, by the YES ON 37 forces.

I was on that phone call. One by one, I heard reporters from major media outlets confuse and divert the whole issue of crimes committed by NO ON 37 forces. These reporters channeled the discussion into an irrelevant nit-picking question: Has the FBI really opened a full-blown investigation into NO ON 37, or is it really just an inquiry or a mild expression of interest?

This theater-of-the-absurd crashed the intent of the press conference, and in the ensuing days, just as election day loomed, sure enough, stories appeared in the press. The gist of these stories was: “no real FBI investigation”; “YES ON 37 had it wrong”; “who’s really deceiving who.”

What started out as an effort to expose very obvious lies and crimes committed by the NO ON 37 forces boomeranged completely.

So, all in all, there is substantial evidence that, in the run-up to election day, and in the criminally insane early call against Prop 37, on election night, very heavy hitters didn’t want Prop 37 to pass.

Therefore, do we foolishly assume the ongoing vote-count in California is going to be honest?

Do we assume the votes that have already been counted and reported in California are true and honest?

Do we accept that Prop 37 is now trailing by 585,464 votes?

No, no, and no.

Many people would like to think we can assume honesty in these matters. It would be nice to believe in the system. But it would a fatal error.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

YES ON 37 CAMPAIGN REFUSES TO CHALLENGE VOTE FRAUD!

by Jon Rappoport

November 10, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Lying down on the road in front of a truck isn’t the best way to end a political campaign, but that’s what the YES ON 37 forces are doing.

In an email sent out on Nov. 9, the PR people for 37 wrote: “They [the leaders of YES ON 37] assume these [millions of uncounted] ballots won’t be in our favor. For this reason the campaign does not want to get involved in the pressuring for counting the remaining votes.”

I guess everybody is a vote-projection expert these days. Wow.

No need to do the actual count, we already know what the score is.

Excuse me while I go out of the room and and scream for a few minutes…

And a few minutes more…

In that email, we learn the brilliant reasoning behind this abject projection of a defeat. Buckle up: “Our understanding of the situation is that the campaign believes these [millions of uncounted votes] are early ballots that were sent in during the beginning stages of the barrage of opposition commercials [by NO ON 37]. These ballots tended vote against Prop 37. They assume the ballots won’t be in our favor.”

I was sure the most insane thing that happened during this fiasco was the early projection of a defeat for 37, by the networks, on election night, with maybe 15 million votes still uncounted. But I was wrong.

This analysis by the YES ON 37 people takes the cake.

But really, what’s going on here is an incredibly naïve approach to politics. YES ON 37 is playing the game by the rules while their opponents are cheating at every turn.

The phrase, “planted the seeds of their own destruction,” comes to mind.

We know that NO ON 37 made numerous false statements in their campaign ads. We know they illegally used the seal of the FDA in those ads. That’s a felony. We know the mainstream press torpedoed YES ON 37 in the waning days of the campaign, by diverting the whole issue of GMO labeling into a non-story about whether the FBI had really opened a full-blown investigation into NO ON 37. We know the networks made a criminally early call against 37 on election night. We know millions of votes are still uncounted. We know that computer rigging in vote-counts is easily done.

But YES ON 37 is just folding up their tent and going away.

They played fair and they got destroyed.

This is the time for multi-front attacks. This is the time to bring on the lawyers. This is the time to bring on some real PR people who can fire real bullets. This is the time for a counter-media attack. This is the time for a 24/7 circus. This is the time for the kind of theater that will make NO ON 37 look like the sick joke it is.

Instead, we get abject surrender.

“Well, folks, be sure you have clean underwear on when you lie down in the street in front of those oncoming trucks. Don’t yell when they rumble over you. Be polite. Make sure your hair is combed. If some of you would like to set yourselves on fire, as a sign of protest, please don’t. Those big trucks are carrying lots of gasoline and they might explode.”

Wanting to know whether the food you eat is shot full of insect genes? It isn’t just nice. It’s essential. It’s about survival.

But YES ON 37 turns out to be a bunch of rainbow people.

They’re doing New Age politics against high-level evil bastards with very deep pockets and major clout.

Fraud wins and goody-good loses.

I’m going to add a coda, because I know I’m going to get lots of emails asking, “What do we do now?” So I’ll tell you here and now.

I’ve been here before. I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now. In 1993, when the forces for health freedom in America were on the move, trying to get a bill passed, in Congress, that would keep the FDA’s soiled hands away from our nutritional supplements, I sat in on meetings and I told the leaders of the movement:

“It’s not enough to get a bill passed in Congress. We have to attack the bad guys. We have to attack the FDA. We have to publicize all their crimes. I have a list of the crimes.

“Here is what we need. We need somebody on our side, a guy who has the money to bankroll a real PR agency for the truth. For the long term.

“I’m talking about a bunch of real PR tigers who work for us. Who can get the truth out there in the press. Who have connections. We need to do this kind of PR night and day.

“The principle is simple. You make the bad guys play defense. You back them up against the wall. You take them out of their game. You destroy them over and over. You show them to be the criminals they are.

“This strategy is as old as the hills. Take a page out of a little thing called the Declaration of Independence. Ever read it? It was a bill of particulars against the Crown. It was an attack. It was specific. It didn’t just say, ‘We’re nice so we deserve freedom.’

“When we launch this super-PR agency, we also include people who can do theater. People who can use their imaginations. Artists. People who can present the criminals in all their naked horror, and do it in such a way that everybody will see, will become outraged, will point fingers, will laugh.

“This PR agency of hungry tigers will not rest. They will be on the move day and night. They will overwhelm the opposition by laying bare scandal after scandal.

“Here is the downside. If we don’t do this, we’ll always be the ones who are on defense. We’ll always get ambushed. We’ll always fall back on the pseudo-religious baloney that ‘we’re right and good.’ That doesn’t even get you a token to ride the subway, my friends.”

Okay?

That’s what we have to do.

And if anybody out there is ready to write me and say, “But that makes us just as bad as the bad guys, that makes us nasty,” don’t bother writing.

There is one thing that distinguishes us from the bad guys. We aren’t bad.

Knowing that is our immortal ace in the hole.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

VOTE FRAUD: WHO DESTROYED PROP 37 ON ELECTION NIGHT?

By Jon Rappoport

November 9, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

“So look, there are fifteen million votes out there we haven’t counted yet. What do you want to do?”

“How long have the polls been closed?”

“Let’s see. Two hours.”

“The hell with it. Let’s call it a defeat for Prop 37.”

“Okay.”

This isn’t over.

We’re not just looking at how many votes in California are still uncounted. We’re not just guessing how it’ll turn out and making little projections. That’s a sucker’s game.

We’re looking at real symptoms of fraud. And fraud has tentacles and arms. You see one piece of fraud, you keep digging for other pieces. You usually find them.

Start with the incredibly early projections made by media outlets on election night. Those projections sank Prop 37.

When you’re in the middle of a football game and the outcome is still in doubt, if somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, that’s called a lie.

It isn’t an estimate or a guess or a prediction. It’s a lie.

There was once a day in American politics when news networks would wait for conclusive election results. They weren’t greedily bent on reporting projections soon and sooner and soonest.

So let’s get that projection-brainwashing out of our heads, all right?

The whole business of making early and earlier predictions on election night is a sham. And it has the effect of inducing people to tune out.

“Okay, Jones won. That’s that. What percentage of the votes have been counted? One half of one percent? Zero percent? Gee, I guess these prediction guys really know what they’re doing. They must have some fabulous computer models, honey. Let’s watch a CSI rerun…”

Here is what happened on election night in California. With many millions of votes still not counted, television stations up and down the state sealed the fate of Prop 37, by saying it had lost.

Many of those California votes are still uncounted. Yesterday, by consulting four of the 57 county registrars in the state, I found 1.6 million votes still unprocessed. That was chicken feed.

An updated report, as of noon today, November 9, posted at the California Secretary of State’s website, indicates that, for all of California, a boggling 3.3 million votes remain uncounted.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

So who called the shots? Who made the early and grossly premature projection on election night? Who told all the media outlets that Prop 37 had been defeated?

I suspected it was Edison Media Research, an outfit that works for the National Election Pool (NEP). NEP is a media consortium that supplies election-night information to the press. This morning I spoke with a representative of Edison, who told me they didn’t make the projection on Prop 37.

If true, that leaves Associated Press (AP) as the leading suspect. AP is part of the National Election Pool as well. AP has awesome resources.

I spoke with Erin Madigan White, media relations manager at AP. I asked her whether AP had made the projections for Prop 37 to media outlets.

She emailed me the following tidbit. It was not quite an answer to my question, but it was illuminating:

“To clarify: AP does not make ‘projections,’ but bases our reporting on counting real votes from every precinct. As our story notes specifically, ‘With all the state’s precincts reporting, Proposition 37 failed 53.1 percent to 46.9 percent.’”

When someone gives you this kind of sleight-of-hand maneuver, it’s called a clue. Let’s start with this phrase: “With all the state’s precincts reporting.” The precincts were all reporting PARTIAL results. Even today, there are 3.3 million votes in CA still to be counted.

This tells you that AP was lying. That’s right. Let’s call it what it was. They were lying about “all precincts.” It was an intentional con.

And what does the phrase “bases our reporting on counting real votes” mean? It certainly means “calling the result of an election.” Because that’s exactly what AP did with Prop 37, based on partial results, on Nov.8. That’s a projection. They say they don’t make projections, but they do. That’s another lie.

On election night, I believe AP must have been the entity who passed voting information on Prop 37 to media outlets throughout California.

AP will not speak about their business relationships with media outlets. They will not name those outlets. They claim “client confidentiality” on this matter. Why?

I believe the answer is obvious. AP, the giant wire service, doesn’t want people to know how much influence they have on what media outlets report. AP doesn’t want the public to know how much of the news, everywhere, comes from AP. And media outlets don’t want their own customers to know how much of what they report is really flat-out or recycled AP material.

This powerful AP influence certainly would extend to election-night reporting.

Knowing how the National Election Pool basically works, I see no other entity who could have played that information-provider role for all the networks, TV stations, radio stations, websites, and newspapers in California…and in the country, on this past election night, with respect to Prop 37.

With millions of votes outstanding and uncounted, I conclude it was AP who provided the data to the networks, who then made the early calls against Prop 37 and sank it.

After I wrote the original article yesterday, which exposed the big lie about Prop 37 early projections, I received many emails. You can read that article here:

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/09/did-peop-37-really-lose-or-was-it-vote-fraud/

Most of the emailers stated they were glad to get the information. A few people questioned my report. They said, “Well, a hundred percent of voting precincts have already sent their vote-counts to the Secretary of State of California.”

Wrong. A hundred percent of precincts have sent PARTIAL vote-counts to the Secretary of State.

A few people said, “Well, the counties in California, who are in charge of counting all votes in their districts, have several weeks to wrap up the count. That happens in every election. Nothing new there.”

I know that. My attack is leveled at the early call against Prop 37 given to the media, on election night, when so many votes were still uncounted, when there was no way to know the final outcome.

A few people said, “Well, of the votes that remain to be counted in California, about two-thirds would have to go YES ON 37 to swing 37 over into victory. That won’t happen.”

Let’s leave that question to the actual vote-count. But we’re not only talking about the odds of getting a victory through counting the rest of the votes. With these horrendous early projections, we’re looking at a symptom of huge fraud here. The smoke in front of the fire:

Who can guarantee that the votes already tallied in California were done faithfully and honestly? Who can guarantee that the voting machines were accurately recording votes?

Given AP’s replies to me, and their policy of secrecy about their media clients, who wants to trust that news giant?

Concerning machine vote-fraud, wake up and smell the coffee. See Bev Harris’ work at blackboxvoting.org and also Victoria Collier’s important articles on this subject. Read up on the 2000 Bush-Gore fiasco and the 2004 Bush-Kerry voting nightmare (especially in Ohio).

Many people have emailed me to ask, “What can we do now?” First of all, the YES ON 37 people have to forget about their concession of defeat. They need to get busy and look into vote fraud.

They have to come back to the playing field.

To return to the football analogy, if you’re in the middle of the game and somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, do you hang your head and walk off and accept the loss? Is that what you do?

Do you bow down to the system, because you’re afraid that, if you object, people will label you “sour grapes” and crazy? Or do you become more relentless?

YES ON 37 needs to demand to look at the voting machines, the software used in the vote-count. YES ON 37 needs to probe, with all they have, into what AP did on election night. And that’s just for starters. Bring on the lawyers. Make some real waves. Shake people up.

Think about this as well. Why was Prop 37 launched in California? Why not Arkansas or Louisiana?

Because it’s well-known that California, historically and presently, is the core of the natural health movement in America. CA is where it really took hold and spread. CA is where everybody and his brother want gluten-free bicycles and organic streetlamps and raw unpasteurized sunglasses and GMO-free underwear.

The sentiment for Prop 37 was overwhelming a couple of months ago. Then, boom. Everything went the other way. It wasn’t just the NO ON 37 ads. It wasn’t just the massive spending by the NO ON 37 forces.

The real specter of vote fraud is here, whether you like it or not.

If, indeed, AP made the early reports or projections or suggestions or advices of defeat for 37 to media outlets, let’s see their data and their models of interpretation. Did they do exit polls? I’ve never heard of AP conducting exit polls.

If as AP claims, they don’t do projections, are we supposed to believe they sent out nothing more than raw-vote counts to a few thousand media outlets in California, and each and every one of those outlets decided, on their own, through their own analysis, that Prop 37 was a lost cause early on election night?

Don’t believe that for a second. These local TV stations and newspapers aren’t independent enough to do that kind of projecting on their own. They were taking advice from somewhere. They were all falling into line. They were merely mouthpieces for someone’s projection.

This should trouble you. It should trouble you greatly. Unless you’re so enamored of projections and computer modeling and data interpretation and honest and honorable vote machines that you’re sure everything is just fine and dandy.

Early dismissive projections on election night are part and parcel of the Big Con. They are wands waved that put people to sleep and elections to bed.

So, no, Virginia. No. Everything is not okay.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

DID PROP 37 REALLY LOSE OR WAS IT VOTE FRAUD?

By Jon Rappoport

November 8, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Hold your horses.

On election night, not long after the polls closed in California, the announcement came out: Prop 37 was losing. A little while later, it was all over. 37 had gone down to defeat.

But is that the whole story? No.

As of 2:30PM today, Thursday, November 8^th, two days after the election, many votes in California remain uncounted.

I tried to find out how many.

It turns out that the Secretary of State of CA, responsible for elections in the state, doesn’t know.

I was told all counties in California have been asked, not ordered, to report in with those figures. It’s voluntary.

So I picked out a few of the biggest counties and called their voter registrar offices. Here are the boggling results:

Santa Clara County: 180,000 votes remain uncounted.

Orange County: 241,336 votes remain uncounted.

San Diego County: 475,000 votes remain uncounted.

LA County: 782,658 votes remain uncounted.

In just those four counties, 1.6 million votes remain uncounted.

The California Secretary of State’s website indicates that Prop 37 is behind by 559,776 votes.

So in the four counties I looked into, there are roughly three times as many uncounted votes as the margin of Prop 37’s defeat.

And as I say, I checked the numbers in only four counties. There are 54 other counties in the state. Who knows how many votes they still need to process?

So why is anyone saying Prop 37 lost?

People will say, “Well, it’s all about projections. There are experts. They know what they’re doing. They made a prediction…”

Really? Who are those experts? I have yet to find them.

For big elections, the television networks rely on a private consortium called the National Election Pool (NEP). NEP does projections and predictions. Did NEP make the premature call on Prop 37? So far I see no evidence one way or the other.

NEP makes some calls for the television networks, but NEP is composed of CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, and AP. It could hardly be called an independent source of information for those networks.

NEP has AP (Associated Press) do the actual vote tabulating, and NEP also contracts work out to Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International to do exit polls and projections based on those polls.

Edison Media Research did the exit polls in the state of Washington for this election. How? They surveyed 1493 people by phone. Based on that, I assume they made all the projections for elections in that state, even though there is no in-person voting in Washington, and voters can submit their ballots by mail, postmarked no later than election Tuesday. So how could Edison know anything worth knowing or projecting on election night?

Both Edison Research and Mitofsky were involved in the 2004 election scandal (Kerry-Bush), in which their exit polls confounded network news anchors, because the poll results were so far off from the incoming vote-counts.

Edison and Mitofsky issued a later report explaining how the disparity could have occurred; they tried to validate their own exit-poll data and the vote-count, which was like explaining a sudden shift in ocean tides by saying clouds covered the moon. It made no sense.

So if NEP did the premature Prop 37 projections that handed 37 a resounding loss, there is little reason to accept their word.

We’re faced with a scandal here. An early unwarranted projection against Prop 37 was made, when so many votes were still uncounted.

Those votes are still uncounted.

Why should we believe anything that comes next?

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com