Category Archives: Elections

Super Tuesday: vote fraud looming? Flashback: Prop 37

Super Tuesday: vote fraud looming? Flashback: Prop 37

by Jon Rappoport

March 1, 2016

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

“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.” — Jon Rappoport

For the Republicans, 12 states and 661 delegates are up for grabs in the Primaries today. Trump is favored to rack up major wins.

If he doesn’t, and if instead Rubio (the GOP Party bosses’ choice) suddenly emerges, look for vote fraud.

As Paul Watson (Infowars) reported this morning, people in Travis County, Texas, have called KLBJ radio to report their votes for Trump were changed on the touch screens: Rubio’s name came up. That would indicate an intentional programming alteration.

There are obviously several ways to achieve vote fraud: reprogramming machines; reprogramming the transfer process, during which vote-counts from multiple machines are combined and added up; reprogramming an even later stage, during which combined vote-totals are merged at a higher level and reported to a wire service (e.g., AP) and/or the vote registrar in the state where voting is taking place.

Dovetailing with this level of fraud, we have the early premature calls of victory issued by television networks, who usually obtain their information from wire services. These quick calls can act as a cover and a diversion, to dampen the possibility that anyone will challenge the result of the election.

To break this down further, here is my article, from November, 2012, on the California Prop 37 scandal. Prop 37 attempted (and failed) to win voter approval for mandating GMO labels on food:

“Did Prop 37 Really Lose Or Was It Vote Fraud?”

Hold your horses.

On election night, not long after the polls closed in California, the announcement came: 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 8th, 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 respond, “Well, it’s all about projections. There are experts. They know what they’re doing. They made a prediction…”

Really? Who are those experts?

For big elections, the television networks often 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 Day. 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 about mail-in ballots 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.

So if NEP did the premature Prop 37 projections that handed Prop 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?

—end article—

Then, a month later, on December 10, 2012, I wrote this:

Food Democracy Now is weighing in on Prop 37 vote fraud, having discovered that the California Secretary of State, in charge of all elections in CA, has stopped posting updates on the ongoing vote count.

From November 6 all the way to up to December 4, these updates were posted daily on the Secretary of State’s website. Then…blackout. No more updates.

Maybe it has something to do with this: On December 4, YES ON 37 votes climbed over the six-million mark: 6,004,628. Food Democracy Now reported it. Then, suddenly, the YES ON 37 votes reversed!

That’s right. They went back to the previously reported number: 5,986,652.

This is apparently a new wrinkle in vote counting. You can not only add votes, you can go backwards. You can lose 18,000 votes with the flick of a wrist or the blink of a digital operation.

Now you see 18,000 Yes votes, now you don’t.

The latest Food Democracy Now article on vote fraud mentions a team of independent statisticians, who have found “statistical anomalies” in the largest voting precincts of nine CA counties, including LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Alameda, and Orange.

To anyone who has followed this debacle of an election, it’s clear that Prop 37 suffered a stunning setback in the early vote reports, on election night. No on 37 jumped out to a huge lead, shortly after the polls closed. Then, Yes on 37 began making up ground.

So it’s likely fraud occurred in that early period.

Also worth noting: I previously wrote about the Secretary of State’s “top-to-bottom” review (2007) of all electronic voting systems then in use in CA. This review discovered fatal flaws in all four systems…but then three of those systems were re-approved for use, after being disqualified. I see no clear evidence that the flaws were fixed.

The top-down review mentioned that Alameda County (one of the counties the team of statisticians is now studying for fraud) had purchased voting machines that turned out to be counterfeits. They had been advertised as legitimate, but they weren’t.

I’m told the Yes on 37 campaign is alert to Food Democracy Now’s charges of fraud, and they are considering a petition for a recount. We’ll see.

Of course, no recount will expose electronic fraud unless very talented experts can examine the full range of electronic systems now in use in CA.

—end of December 2012 article—

This should give you a flavor of vote fraud at work.

On the surface, it’s all vanilla. But as you dig down, you find rotting material.

power outside the matrix

Finally, in December, 2012, I wrote this:

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.

—And what that oligarchy wants; what they want to win, and who they want to win…

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 29th 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.

The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

by Jon Rappoport

January 27, 2016

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

Note: This article was written before the Oregon shootout in which one man was killed and another wounded.

Is uranium at the heart of the Oregon Malheur federal-protestor standoff? That’s the question I’m asking. It isn’t a flippant question.

I realize there are many other issues swirling around this event. The Hammonds, the Bundys, militias, the feds, cattle grazing on federal lands, federal land grabs, and so on. This article isn’t meant to take apart those matters.

It’s meant to follow up on my previous article, in which I present a circumstantial case for the Clintons’ heavy involvement in a scheme that’s transferred 20% of US uranium production to Putin and Russia. And the key company in that piece is Uranium One. Remember the name. It’s apparently a major clue in what I’m about to discuss.

I also want to say, at the outset, that I don’t know how many independent news outlets and websites are covering the uranium question, or which outlet initiated this line of investigation. I’m relying on one provocative January 23 article at intellihub, by Shepard Ambellas:

“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”

Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.

On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.

“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.

“The Vale District has agreed to work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on mitigation for the ‘New U’ uranium claims, which are located in core sage grouse habitat. Although the lands encompassing the claims have been designated core, the area is frequented by rockhounds and hunters, and has a crisscrossing of off-highway vehicle (OHV) roads and other significant land disturbance from the defunct Bretz Mercury Mine, abandoned in the 1960s.

“However, by the fall of 2012 the company said that it was putting its plans for the mine on hold until the uncertainty surrounding sage grouse issues was resolved.”

The first sentence in that BLM section ties together several key elements of the story: Uranium One; a uranium mine; southern Malheur County. Southern Malheur is the general area of the federal-protestor standoff. Let me give you that first sentence again:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon.”

What does this have to do with Hillary and Bill Clinton? I’ll reprint my previous article so you can read the details, but the short version is: there’s a case to be made that they, through Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation, facilitated the sale of Uranium One to Putin and the Russians. And if so, and if this area of Oregon is projected to be part of that uranium mining deal, then we are looking at a stunning “coincidence”: the US federal government is coming down hard on a group of protestors who are occupying, for their own reasons, a very valuable piece of territory that goes far beyond the issue of private cattle grazing on government land.

It comes under the heading of those old familiar lines: you have no idea what you’re involved in; you have no idea who you’re messing with; this is way over your head; you just stepped into the middle of something that’s bigger than you can imagine.

Here is my previous article in full, “The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium.” I’ll have a few important comments to make after the article:

—She’s the next US President, if an old socialist, a cowboy real estate hustler, and a bunch of emails can’t stop her.

He already was the President.

They’re married. Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics. Wow. In a land where they’re the first couple, does anybody have tickets to sell for the next flight to Mars?

Before I board my flight, what about the uranium scandal?

The what?

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this, consider—suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple has been running a kind of parallel operation to the government, in the form of a foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want political favors. Just suppose. And a few donors who are ponying up those $$ want to sell a company to the Russians. But because this company sells a very, very sensitive product, and that product happens to come out of the ground in the US, agencies of the US government have to approve the sale. And one of those agencies that does approve the sale happens to be headed up by half of that beautiful couple. And this sensitive American product, well, the last person you’d want to control it is the head of a place called Russia—he can sit in Moscow and have complete dominion over this product that exists on US soil…and nobody thinks this is a problem, as half of the beautiful couple runs for President of the United States. It’s a yawn. It was a big story for a day or two, and then it sank below memory and everybody moved on. Forget about it. Who cares?

Memory is short. On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal”.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controls a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times:

“…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

From the Times:

“The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

“At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

“Whether the donations [to the Clinton Foundation] played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

“In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one ‘has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.’ He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the [uranium] deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. ‘To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,’ he added.”

—The US State Dept. had to sign off on the deal giving Putin control over US uranium. Hillary headed up the State Dept. Much money from Canadian mining executives, who obviously wanted the deal to go through, found its way into the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation concealed these donations.

That’s called a circumstantial case. Every such case is different, and has to be judged by assessing probabilities. But for example, if an examination of two involved prominent figures revealed they were serial liars, it would strengthen a verdict of guilty.

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? And she’s going to be the next President? Can we give her a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

Good times.

—end of article—

power outside the matrix

So we have the Clintons, and Uranium One sold to Putin, and that sale gives him control of 20% of US uranium production. Now we have an area in Southern Oregon which has uranium, and in this area, the feds are coming down on the protestors and the occupiers.

What are the feds really trying to protect? Are they just trying to stop cattle grazing and routine burns on that land, or is there something more far precious at stake?

The feds aren’t known for making delicate distinctions. People are raising a bit of hell in the general (or specific) area where uranium mining could commence. Get them out of there! Move them off! No more cattle grazing here! This is a matter of national security!

Or it was. Now it’s a matter of Russian national security.

Make deal, protect the dealers. It’s business.

Consider the potential scandal and the massive irony: US citizens are asserting their sovereign right to use federal land, land that should never have been co-opted by the federal government in the first place—and now it turns out to be Russian land.

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 29th 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.

The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium

The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium

by Jon Rappoport

January 26, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

She’s the next US President, if an old socialist, a cowboy real estate hustler, and a bunch of emails can’t stop her.

He already was the President.

They’re married. Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics. Wow. In a land where they’re the first couple, does anybody have tickets to sell for the next flight to Mars?

Before I board my flight, what about the uranium scandal?

The what?

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this, consider—suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple has been running a kind of parallel operation to the government, in the form of a foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want political favors. Just suppose. And a few donors who are ponying up those $$ want to sell a company to the Russians. But because this company sells a very, very sensitive product, and that product happens to come out of the ground in the US, agencies of the US government have to approve the sale. And one of those agencies that does approve the sale happens to be headed up by half of that beautiful couple. And this sensitive American product, well, the last person you’d want to control it is the head of a place called Russia—he can sit in Moscow and have complete dominion over this product that exists on US soil…and nobody thinks this is a problem, as half of the beautiful couple runs for President of the United States. It’s a yawn. It was a big story for a day or two, and then it sank below memory and everybody moved on. Forget about it. Who cares?

Memory is short. On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal”.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controls a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times:

“…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

From the Times:

“The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

“At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

“Whether the donations [to the Clinton Foundation] played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

“In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one ‘has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.’ He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the [uranium] deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. ‘To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,’ he added.”

—The US State Dept. had to sign off on the deal giving Putin control over US uranium. Hillary headed up the State Dept. Much money from Canadian mining executives, who obviously wanted the deal to go through, found its way into the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation concealed these donations.

That’s called a circumstantial case. Every such case is different, and has to be judged by assessing probabilities. But for example, if an examination of two involved prominent figures revealed they were serial liars, it would strengthen a verdict of guilty.

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? And she’s going to be the next President? Can we give her a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

Good times.

power outside the matrix

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 29th 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.

Hello, world: is your government driving you crazy?

Politics, the god Hermes, and the big joke

Suppose, against all odds, enlightenment is funny and funny works like magic because it is magic

by Jon Rappoport

December 19, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

Note: If, as you read this article, you think I’m saying ‘don’t worry, be happy’ or ‘just laugh it off’ or ‘forget all the suffering in the world,’ you’re viewing it from the wrong angle. The 1968 riot at the Democratic National Convention was very serious, and it did nothing to shorten the war in Vietnam. It might have prolonged it. In this article, I’m talking about a basic psychological and spiritual inhibition that keeps people from a kind of mass reaction they believe is unthinkable—but a reaction that would change reality in a revolutionary fashion, if it came from their deepest core…

I could write a few thousand pages as a mere introduction—but I want to focus on one factor: what people project into their leaders.

Yes, I know, that sounds a bit odd. But stay with me. I’ll make it pay off.

For example, in the US, Republican voters and supporters project a huge amount of faith and energy into their Republican leaders. If you could see this, you would be watching a stunning “light show.” I’m talking about streamers and arrows and rays of energy.

And in this particular light show, there are messages: defund Planned Parenthood; cut off money for massive migration programs; stop Obamacare funding; don’t give money to the climate change payout program; stop bankrolling sanctuary cities.

That’s what these Republicans want from their leaders. That’s what they’re projecting with great insistence.

And this isn’t some kind of misplaced crazy light show, because guess what? Republicans control the US House of Representatives by a wide margin. Republicans: 246. Democrats: 188.

So when a massive federal spending bill ($1.1 trillion) comes up for a vote, as it just has, Republican Congress members can call the shots. They can respond to all those light rays being projected at them by their supporters all over the land. They can do it in a second. No problem. They can make their people happy. They can carry out their people’s wishes.

But…they didn’t. In fact, they just voted to fund all those programs I just mentioned. They pulled a vast switch. That’s right. That would be like all those Stars Wars characters, with their light sabers, suddenly projecting them through the movie screen right back at their adoring audience in the theater and burning them. What a message that would be.

Has your government ever done something like this in your country? I bet they have.

When it happens, the people, the voters, the supporters, who were sure their leaders would respond to them…well, to say they’re shocked would be a vast understatement.

However, scanning the newspapers and news broadcasts in America today, so far I find no reports of massive Republican demonstrations in the streets. Millions marching on Washington DC? Thousands? Hundreds? Dozens? Four? Two?

One guy in a Star Wars costume with a light saber trying to stop traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue?

Try to imagine the amount of energy and faith Republicans in America have been expending and projecting at their leaders—with this Big Switch as the result.

And then consider this: the Republicans in the US House of Representatives—many of them—never intended to go to war over this massive budget bill. It was never in the cards. They wear special shields, and the shields ward off all the projected rays coming at them from their faithful flock.

It’s not just the Republicans, in case you think I’m taking sides. What about the huge Democratic support for the invasion of Iraq under George W Bush? Did you see a few million Democrats in the streets right after the nearly unanimous Congressional vote to launch the planes and send the troops?

Wherever you live in the world, I’m sure you’ve seen this sort of thing. “Vote for Joe. He’ll do this and that.” Joe wins, and then doesn’t do either this or that. He was never going to. He was always wearing one of those shields that protected him from what his supporters were projecting at him.

This is called a joke.

That’s right. It may be a painful, repellent, nasty, killer joke with horrendous consequences, but it’s a joke.

The structure that is supposed to yield up “what the people want” is actually another structure whose features are unreported.

And the joke is, the people fall for it. Not just once, but over and over, on and on, year after year, decade after decade. It doesn’t matter what the evidence says. They fall for it.

And then, as another punchline, when some of those people stop falling for it and defect from the structure, they’re called strange and odd and weird and possibly dangerous.

“Don’t you get it, you strange person? You’re in a stage play. And your role involves going along with the charade. The real machinations are occurring behind the stage, and they’re not part of the play at all, but we don’t think about that. We keep projecting our energy and desires and faith into our purported leaders. Haven’t you read the script? The play falls apart if we don’t do that. It makes no sense if we don’t do that. A leader isn’t a leader if he doesn’t have adoring supporters who project their hopes and fears and desires and energy into him. That’s the way it works. So get with it.”

Now, possibly you think, when I talk about “projecting energy,” this is just a metaphor. I have news. It isn’t. This is as real as waves breaking on a beach. It’s happening all the time. People are doing it. They don’t want to stop doing it. It’s a habit that, for them, is harder to break than a heroin addiction.

One way or another, everybody is projecting energy. Of course, if they know that, they can decide where and how. They can, as individuals, create those projections in connection with achieving their deepest desires and dreams. In which case, there is a very good chance this would be a better world.

On the other hand, if they remain in the stage play and accept their assigned roles, they get jokes. And they’re the target of those massive jokes. And they don’t laugh. Generally, they go into a state of psychic paralysis, because they can’t figure out what just happened.

They might consult the news to find answers. That’s another joke. In the case of the $1.1 trillion budget bill that just passed the House in the US, they would encounter this: well, you see, the Republicans were trying to show support for their new Speaker, Paul Ryan, who is in favor of the bill, and if they didn’t vote for the bill the federal government would have to shut down because it would have no money for operational expenses, and the bill does allow the US to export crude oil, which is very important.

These are the added punchlines, which ought to send any sane person rolling on the floor with laughter.

You can laugh or cry, it’s your choice. But keep in mind that this joke really belongs to the people who launch it, and they don’t care which way you respond. To them, it’s still hilarious. And when they think about the millions of people who still vote for them, they put in a call for medical staff, because they’re going to laugh so hard they might need oxygen.

Sure, they leave Washington for a while, to “spend time with their families over the holidays,” just in case there is some nasty pushback from loyal voters, but they’re having a very merry Xmas, in part because they’re still chuckling and chortling about what they just put over.

George Burns once said: “In acting, sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

In politics, the launching and projecting of the joke is handled by the politicians and the media. They work hand in hand to conceal the fact that it is a joke—which is what makes it so funny to all of them.

I can take this out much farther. Consensus reality, which is the lowest possible common denominator to which the planet can be reduced, in order to suck in the faith and projections of the largest number of people, is its own kind of joke. You can find such an awareness at least as far back as ancient Greece, in the person of Hermes, the trickster god.

Hermes, among his other duties, was the protector of wit. He was the upsetter of apple carts, the vast joker who, in his own way, if you read between the lines, was trying to show people they were living inside a continuum of the big con, the big hustle. He was, you could say, the grand defector. He moved among various realities. He knew the world was a badly written stage play that, on the heels of honest reviews, would have closed down after opening night.

Hermes’ powers were formidable. He had the juice to become king of Mt. Olympus, but he never wanted that job. Instead, he flew hither and yon, tearing holes in consensus reality, for his own amusement, but also to wake people up.

He was not always popular with leaders of the day.

If he were alive in our time, what might he do? I can imagine him trying to engineer, at a State of the Union Address, or during a Presidential debate, a massive amount of laughter from the live audience. Yes, he might attempt to promote a trick like that. All of sudden, out of nowhere, in a trickle, a little stream, then a river, people are laughing. It builds to an oceanic roar. It spills over to the television audience. No one is sure why, but they’re laughing at the President and candidates, and they’re having the time of their lives. On some level of happiness and joy, they’re finally responding to the joke. At last.

They get it.

Hence the old phrase, “He was laughed off the stage.”

Exit From the Matrix

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

And that’s exactly what happens. The leaders are laughed and ridiculed into oblivion. And so is the old consensus itself.

“You know, people have been telling that joke ever since I don’t when, and I never understood it, but now all of a sudden I do. And what makes it keep paying off, those leaders who are stage-center are so serious…wow, they’re killing me.”

Yes, that’s right. Well, they were killing you. It’s not quite the same anymore.

It turns out that, while we thought we were watching (and acting in) one kind of stage play, on a subconscious level we were all sitting in an audience, for the past ten thousand years, watching a tireless comedian doing variations on a cosmic joke, on and on, and there were zero laughs, zero, and nevertheless he kept going—and voila, the place finally exploded.

We had every reason not to laugh. All the suffering and the pain—but when we did connect with the joke, it proved to be enormously effective, beyond anything we could predicted.

Our core NATURAL response, beyond all “common sense,” from the depths of our NATURAL being, repressed for centuries, was titanic laughter, and it sent our esteemed leaders straight to the Outer Darkness.

Who knew? Go figure.

Bam. Pow.

The world starts over.

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 29th 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.

Republican Presidential debate an exercise in mind control

Republican Presidential debate an exercise in mind control

Let’s find an alternative universe

by Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2015

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

If a human mind were composed of a dozen eggs, and you soft-boiled them, broke them open, and let the goo run all over the plate, down on to the table, soon dripping on to the floor, that would be mind control, in the sense that you’re creating meaningless chaos, where no thought is important or makes sense or adds up to a cogent point.

That was the CNN-hosted Republic Presidential debate, with what was it, nine candidates sounding off, interrupting one another, and mentioning Trump so often it seemed like they were afflicted with a one-note samba syndrome.

You could conclude CNN, a Democratic stronghold, wanted the chaos, to throw the Republicans into an exceedingly bad and foul light, but other recent Presidential debates, hosted by other networks, have come across in the same basic fashion.

The problem starts with networks hosting these lunatic events. Since when does a debate need a moderator who controls and asks all the questions? Since when does a network need to have any role at all?

A debate is supposed to be two people contending over an important issue.

For contrast, consider the 1858 Abraham Lincoln-Stephen Douglas face-off—when apparently citizens still had a semblance of intelligence. Both men were running for a US Senate seat in Illinois. In those days, state legislatures chose US Senators.

But the issue in the debates was slavery, so the interest was intense and it was national. Here was the agreed-upon format: seven debates in seven Illinois towns over the course of three weeks; in each debate, the opening candidate would speak for 60 minutes, his opponent would speak for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate would return for 30 minutes.

The debates drew large crowds. Chicago newspapers had stenographers in each town. The stenos took down every word, and newspapers across the nation printed, in full, the texts.

Those were debates. No one with sprayed hair was in control. The men talked. And talked.

If you could transport the CNN Republican debate back in time to one of those Illinois towns, the audience would conclude, in short order, that all the participants were insane, possibly suffering from brain damage.

“These people are running for…what did you say? President??!!?? You’re joking. This a joke, yes?”

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the state of the country in 2015? A country that actually acquiesced in a “debate” of this sort?

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the two political parties, in 2015, who permitted such debates, and about the general electorate who expressed partisan support for either party?

“And in your time, 2015, no third or fourth party of any strength has arisen to sweep these mad Democrats and Republicans into the dustbin?”

No, the Lincoln-Douglas debates didn’t settle the issue of slavery. Something called the Civil War broke out. But that fact doesn’t excuse what these crazed Presidential debates have devolved into.

I’d really like to see one of these 2015 Presidential candidates take the podium and speak for 90 minutes about a single issue. You’d have to have support teams standing by to administer oxygen and possibly meth, just to keep them upright.

We’re talking about a candidate staying on point, on one issue.

“I remember my grandmother telling me, when I was nine, you can do it, you can be anything you want to be. I’d like to thank Mrs. Gallbladder, my third-grade teacher, for spending time with me when I—people say we should have a balanced budget, but they just don’t understand how economics—there weren’t any emails, well there were but none of them compromised—ownership of the means of production isn’t—better schools for our children—attacking terrorists by insulting them isn’t—equality isn’t just for—my father was President and so was my brother but—I made great deals to put up those hotels—when I look at a human brain on the operating table, I know what this universe—this isn’t the first time a woman has tried to win the Presidency but—“

Goo and more goo running everywhere.

Reporters and PR flacks and party hacks seizing on a few words of the opponent and highlighting them on social media. “Can you believe he slipped up and said Afro-American?” “Did you see that fly on his nose?” “A red tie with a blue suit is supposed to look Presidential?” “I counted. He interrupted nine times.” And these are the more intelligent tweets.

On the other hand, the current TV debates preclude the possibility of something dangerous happening. For example, in a real contest, suppose the single issue was Syria and a candidate stepped up to the podium and said:

“During my remarks in the next sixty minutes, with no interruptions—yes, we’re going back to a much older format—I’ll be the making the case that the current US administration has essentially created ISIS, in part for the purpose of overthrowing the present government of Syria. Consider this fact alongside our declared ‘war’ against ISIS. This is more than an outrageous contradiction. It’s an intentional deception, and a crime of the highest order, considering what ISIS has been carrying out in terms of the destruction of human life. Now, I’m not just saying these things. I have evidence in the form of documents, which I’ll be explaining in detail. Some of these documents and reports are already public. Others are not. I also have statements, on the record, from US military officers and Pentagon executives. So bear with me, stay with me, I’m going to take this one step at a time…”

There are many ways to keep this sort of thing from happening. The easiest way: never let a true debate occur.

Give Rand Paul 90 uninterrupted minutes to explain what his father was explaining? The criminality of the Federal Reserve? Are you kidding?

And just in case you think the American public is so addled they wouldn’t be able to follow such a presentation, I have a secret for you. At first, it would be a problem, yes. But if more and more true debates took place, a change would bleed in. People would begin to wake up. They’d find themselves, bit by bit, intensely interested in the proceedings.

After all, part of the reason the public is brainwashed springs directly from the fact that so few politicians or media people tell the truth or explore any issue in depth. Reverse that trend and the mind begins to reassemble itself.

How about something like this? Crossing party lines, Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul debate, seven times, as Lincoln and Douglas did, the following: “What is socialism, and is it good for America?”

If either candidate were unable to do more than spout vapid generalities and programmatic fumes during his seven hours, it would surely become obvious.

How about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, in the same format, debating the question: “Describe in detail the best immigration policy for America.” If their seven events turn into a Niagara of opposing non-sequiturs and self-inflating jive, so be it. It’ll be on parade for all to see.

the matrix revealed

Seven hours. Quickly, all Presidential candidates would discover their usual manner of presentation doesn’t stand up. It doesn’t make the grade. That would be a good thing. Maybe we find out that no one currently running for President can remain coherent. That would be a very good thing.

And maybe someone emerges from the shadows, someone most people have never heard of, and he can pass the test with flying colors. He can make sense, he can make a case, he can present details and specifics, he can inspire confidence, he can paint a picture of what America and freedom and true justice are all about.

Because he has the time. Because he has the courage and the intelligence. Because he makes people remember what they really want.

Would that be terrible? Would that be treasonous? Would that be dangerous?

No.

That would be waking up out of amnesia.

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 29th 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.

What is Donald Trump doing to media reality?

What is Donald Trump doing to media reality?

by Jon Rappoport

December 11, 2015

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

“Even if Trump is a prop-figure set up to sweep the other Republican candidates off the board and pave the way for Hillary to win the election, something else is going on. Something deeper and much weirder.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Donald Trump, a figure of authority? A folk-hero? A man who can say anything, get away with it, and become more popular? How did this happen? How was Trump sculpted, if you will, to become what he is now?

NBC once loved him. Let’s not forget that. They set up The Apprentice for him. There he sat, a Pope of business, a genius of goof, deciding which contestants moved on and which were expelled into the outer darkness with their luggage. The tasks the contestants strove to complete were ridiculous. They ended up (winners and losers alike) looking like demented and humiliated kiddie-props in a parody of “the business of America is business.”

(“Okay, your assignment is to make signs, stand on a street corner, and sell yak dung.”)

No problem. For several seasons, the television audience adored the show. “You’re fired” became Trump’s signature. And of course, now, during the Presidential campaign, he’s doing the same thing—firing everybody he can think of. To say this is appealing to millions of people is a vast understatement.

Trump is firing politicians, candidates, media, the GOP, immigrants, government bureaucrats, trade representatives and their deals. Wherever he casts his eye, there is somebody to dump.

Trump began as a media creation. They embraced him as a brash, interesting, weird cartoon—and he went with it.

He came across like a happy greedy child playing with toys—hotels, casinos, apartment buildings, golf courses. Then he’d allude to his own brilliance in being able to maneuver the deals that brought the toys into existence.

The media loved this. They loved his crazy hair. They loved his wives, his marriages, his grin, his unselfconscious babble. They kept building him up.

“When I’m President,” he says now, “I’ll make better deals. For America.” Well, he’s already been popularized by media, if only in a Disneyesque animation, as the king of dealmakers. It fits.

In the middle of this campaign storm, Trump and the media are joined at the hip. The media created him, and now they can’t shake him off. He’s a fascist, he’s a racist, the pundits say, but it doesn’t matter. They keep trying to dig his grave and put him in it, but there is no funeral. The more they attack him, the more excitement they generate.

If it turned out The Donald were a closet hermaphrodite, would it really matter? Or would his followers say, “Wow, that’ll show those LGBT fanatics.”

Now, throw into the mix how large numbers of people feel about open borders, terror attacks, gun control, and the export of American jobs overseas—their guy, Trump, is reflecting those feelings with unmistakably decisive remarks, without a teleprompter, without sing-song political-android vagueness…so you have a super-potent catalyst roaming the countryside, blowing people out of their passive minds.

Trump isn’t manipulating the media, he isn’t sitting around thinking of ways to stir up their hatred, he isn’t a Hillary with teams of lizards calculating which issue she should pounce on at any given moment, he isn’t a Jeb huddling in his own pool of tears with a few billion bucks, planning his comeback. Trump jots down a quick note on a napkin, puts it in his pocket, strides through a crowd, gets up on a stage, and lets it rip. Everything he says reminds him of something else and he goes with the latest thought. His speeches look like a roadmap of a bee’s zig-zag through a pasture.

The media are suffering from the Frankenstein Effect. They invented Trump, and now he is taking them to a place they don’t want to go.

He’s already trekked into no-go zones. For example, he’s said that of course vaccines can cause autism. What happens, for example, if tomorrow he suddenly changes his current message on ISIS (bomb them, censor them online) and says of course the US government created ISIS and now the Obama administration is patting itself on the back for stepping up military action against its own partner? What happens if he starts pounding on that tune?

Wild card, joker in the deck, loose cannon, cowboy don’t even begin to describe what Trump is becoming. His supporters are also celebrating a revolt against political correctness, and Trump is their man. Carefully assess what you say before you say it? Are you kidding? In this sense as well, the media have created their own problem, acting as shills and cheerleaders for correct language—and now that op is coming back to haunt them.

Here’s another tidbit. For the past 20 years, the media have been gargling and sputtering and uttering mealy-mouthed he-said he said “reports” about the effects of Globalism on American jobs. Trump has taken that creature out to the barn and shot it. He’s talking about rescinding the trade deals that have been forwarding Globalism. Does he mean it? Does he understand what such an effort would take? His followers think so.

Waiting in the wings: If Trump addresses residents of inner cities, directly and often, and tells them he will bring back jobs for them (whereas no one else will), who knows how much trouble he could stir up in the ranks of the Republican and Democratic parties, and who knows how much support will pour out of those decimated inner-city communities.

This isn’t Rand Paul or Ron Paul or Ralph Nader or Bernie Sanders talking about Globalism. This is a billionaire marshal riding into town and promising to flash coin. This is the host of The Apprentice saying, “I can fire, but I also can hire.” This is a wide-screen IMAX cartoon saying, “I’m real. I’ll bring back prosperity.”

How do the Sunday morning news-talk hosts and their guest experts stand up against him? Trump is shrugging and summarily announcing, “They’re jerks.” He’s blowing away the media who made him, and they can’t undo what they’ve birthed.

The conventional wisdom is Trump will fall when the media uncover something truly horrible from his past and blast it out, day after day. You mean saying the Internet needs to be censored and many immigrants must be deported isn’t enough to sink his ship? So far, apparently not.

And scandals and possible scandals have already been aired. There was the accusation that he raped his wife Ivana. She eventually defended him and said no. Four of his companies have declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy. According to Salon, he was a figurehead for a company called ACN, which operated as a pyramid scheme. Trump denied having anything to do with ACN. There are ongoing legal actions against Trump University in New York and California, claiming the University committed fraud and deception against students in its real estate curriculum and hustled them for millions of $$.

This last potential scandal carries the most danger, in part because the NY case is headed up by the state Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, who has filed a $40 million lawsuit against Trump. Former students have filed two class-action suits against The Donald.

And yet…all the above-mentioned scandals have already been covered in the press, and Trump’s poll ratings haven’t suffered.

What’s going on?

Originally, the media created Trump as a celebrity and a phenomenon. They made him big. A very big and wild and weird cartoon. Now they’re trying to destroy him. But they can’t make him small and inconsequential because, again, they made him big and wild and weird, and the audience accepted him on that basis, in that image. The audience already took him in, already accepted and digested him. Media creations are hard to reverse when they’re cartoons. People love cartoons. Can anybody make Mickey Mouse vanish? Can anybody make the Simpsons forgettable?

The case of another famous cartoon is instructive: Arnold Schwarzenegger. He rode to victory, in 2003, and won the governorship of California based on his media-image as an all-powerful animation. It wasn’t until he was serving as governor that the picture faded. Only then did people realize he was just another politician. His infidelity, his fathering of a child with the family housekeeper, was the ultimate torpedo—but that scandal erupted long after his super-gloss had already dimmed.

Notice this: as The Arnold was running for the governorship in 2003, it was already on the record (1977) that he had used steroids (they were legal then) and had participated in orgies. Just several days before the election, the LA Times and CNN broke a story about “Gropegate.” Several women came forward with accounts of breast-grabbing, buttock-grabbing. Another woman said Schwarzenegger had tried to remove her swimsuit in an elevator.

On Election Day, Arnold won by over a million votes. He beat out his closest competitor by 17 points.

Disney built an empire based on cartoons. John Wayne built a career being a cartoon. Comic books, graphic novels, and the movies based on them are blockbusters. Twelve days before the opening of the latest Star Wars movie, people are already camping out at theaters.

Meaning? People want to see reality reduced to extremes. One reason: they’re annoyed by subtleties. Another reason: they really believe that, at bottom, when the smoke and mirrors are removed, the world is a drama of light vs. dark, good vs. evil. If you think you can make that idea go away, you’re crazy.

And suppose on some level this drama is, in fact, playing out. Suppose a man riding in on years-worth of media-inflation says, in no uncertain terms, he can win that war. Suppose he actually believes it. Suppose he appeals to millions of people in a way that no other politician on the scene can, because he communicates in a loose direct conversational style, instead of droning on in the usual political cliché carved out by public-relations idiots for candidates who can’t escape sounding and looking like androids. Suppose his version of being a cartoon is “I’m the most honest guy you’ll ever meet.”

Suppose, among the blizzard of his statements and remarks, he is pinpointing several deep ongoing crimes of government, crimes other candidates are terrified of touching.

Suppose for decades now, the whole standard media-PR charade of national elections has conspired to outrage and sicken the American public.

Suppose Trump appears to be the opposite of standard.

Suppose the public is so fed up with this election charade they’d excuse their man, The Donald, if it came out that he’d dropped his mother in a volcano on Xmas Eve.

Suppose the media, who are trying to destroy Trump, have no one to blame but themselves, because they’ve been supporting thousands of political lies and liars for a long, long time using language no one cares about anymore.

Whereas the big, wild, and weird man coming into town is speaking in a different tongue.

Suppose, therefore, this is a clash of dimensions the media simply cannot understand.

In that case, what are we set for?

The people who hate the Trump the most continue to miss the point that he is coming with a different language, and his train and their train are passing, on different rails, in the night.

Once a Donald Duck, you last forever. Don’t underestimate that. Give Donald a fiery sword and a mission and a new and different quack, and you’ve got something that grabs the American subconscious and delivers a shock to the system.

“A cartoon came alive? He’s coming to town? He’s on television? He’s running for President? Get out of my way, I have to see this. I have to be part of it.”

After all, American society has turned into a cartoon. Yes, it can be vicious and painful. It can deliver terminal blows. But it’s an animation. When a piece of it suddenly detaches itself and steps forward into the light and talks, you better believe people are interested. Accept it, don’t accept it, Obama was one of those pieces, Bush was a piece, Clinton was certainly a piece. But none of them was as strange as Donald Trump.

power outside the matrix

If somehow he wins the nomination, it remains to be seen how he’ll fare against that “woman sketch” named Hillary Clinton, a venal and vengeful and entitled caricature trying to keep her Shriek under control as she barrels down the road, smoke coming out her ears, toward the Oval Office.

It seems like a long time ago that one of the biggest networks in the world put Trump in a throne before a national audience every week—where he said over and over again, “You’re fired, you’re fired, you’re fired.” Is it really that surprising he can do the same thing now and find a huge audience?

The network, NBC, was Dr. Frankenstein. They brought Trump to life, and then he broke away, turned around, and attacked his masters.

It just so happens millions of people also want to attack NBC and the other networks and major news sources in this country for their wall-to-wall lies, their arrogant sense of entitlement, their insider clubby presumptions, their sold-out alliance with government and corporations, and their refusal to listen to the concerns of every-day Americans.

These media giants have been creating reality for the masses.

A revolt is in progress against that reality and its perpetrators.

A large number of Americans have come to the aid of a man/media-creation who, in his own way (love it or hate it), is leading it.

What else would you expect to happen?

You’re fired, you’re fired, you’re fired.

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 29th 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.

Is Jeb Bush the hidden clue in 2016 election?

Is Jeb Bush the hidden clue in 2016 election?

Are we seeing a replay of the 1992 election?

by Jon Rappoport

November 9, 2015

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

Is Jeb Bush really a wet limp noodle, whining, complaining, saying there are “cooler” things he can do than run for President?

Or does he already know something about the outcome of the election?

For a man who obviously realized, long ago, that he was going to run for the highest office in the land, he’s certainly made a strange mess of it so far.

He’s turned himself into a little boy huddling in a corner, calling mommy, daddy, and brother for advice.

Does he think Trump, Carson, and Rubio are going to implode, after which he’ll reconstitute himself and stride into the spotlight? Or does he already know this isn’t his time?

Does he already know Hillary has been tapped, by the powers-that-be, for the Presidency?

Her team, behind the scenes, has cobbled together some 500 super-delegates, people whose votes count in the Primaries, but who aren’t subject to the results of state-by-state Primary elections.

Are we seeing a replay of what happened in the 1992 election, when Jeb’s father, President George H W Bush, went down to a very surprising defeat at the hands of another Clinton, Bill?

Before that election, according to Terry Reed and John Cummings, authors of the shocking 1994 book, Compromised, Bill was involved with the CIA in some very dirty dealings in Arkansas—and I’m not just talking about the cocaine flights landing at the Mena airport.

It seems Bill had agreed to set up CIA weapons-making factories in his home state, under the radar. But because Arkansas, when it comes to money, is all cronies all the time, everybody and his brother found out about the operation and wanted in.

This security breach infuriated the CIA, and a meeting was held to dress down Bill and make him see the error of his ways. His CIA handlers told him they were going to shut down the whole weapons operation, because Bill had screwed up royally. A screaming match ensued—but the CIA people backed off a bit and told Bill he was still “their man” for the upcoming 1992 run for the Presidency.

Of course, there are people who think Reed and Cumming’s book is fiction, but John Cummings used to be a top-notch reporter for Newsday. He co-authored the 1990 book, Goombata, about the rise and fall of John Gotti. He exposed US operations to destroy Cuban agriculture with bio-weapons. It’s highly doubtful he would have put his name on Compromised without a deep conviction he was correctly adding up the facts.

I point all this out, because it’s possible, once again, that a Clinton, in 2015, is dealing from greater inside strength than a Bush is.

And if so, perhaps Jeb is simply folding up his tent because he doesn’t want to play the game and then, in preordained fashion, lose to Hillary.

“Look Jeb, your family had two Presidents. The Clintons get two, as well.”

the matrix revealed

As I mentioned, some people believe Jeb will jump into the race with both feet when Trump and Carson fade, and he is just biding his time. But if so, he’s fiddling around on the sidelines in the worst possible way. He’s making himself look like an abject loser. His campaign coffers may be bulging, but his persona is shrinking down to the size of a teardrop.

No doubt, behind the scenes, his people are pushing negative Hillary narratives (Benghazi, her personal email server, her health), and they may have even more explosive charges in their bag. But for now, Jeb appears to be a dead star, hovering in a nowhere sky.

Does he know that elite-shaped destiny, for 2016, has already snuffed out a Bush?

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 29th 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.

When Hillary “dodged sniper fire”

When Hillary “dodged sniper fire”

by Jon Rappoport

October 19, 2015

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

“Political candidates for high office are virtual illusions assembled out of media dust. They are solidified cartoons presented on television. The real lives of the people who are thus animated by media are of no concern. Indeed, it is the job of the candidates to conceal their real lives and thoughts and emotions, to avoid frightening the stunted children who vote for them on Election Day. Political leadership roles were never designed for authentic persons. Such persons, in significant numbers, would crash the system and expose it as a complete fraud. The art of building the political system depends on mass minds tuned to caricatures, minds that can’t carry the freight of anything heavier. Therefore, society’s architects set about their work: thinning out consciousness itself.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

—I recall. No, I don’t recall. What difference does it make? Let’s move on. There are more important issues facing the American people—

When a sleazy politician of the first order is faced with her own lie, there is always “something more important to discuss.”

And of course, she simply “misspoke.” Misspeaking is an action reserved for the few. It doesn’t apply to everyone else. Everyone else lies.

Sharyl Attkisson wrote an instructive article about Hillary’s perilous 1996 “sniper” trip to Bosnia. Instructive, because she was there with Hillary.

Attkisson writes:

“The trip in 1996 would later become grist for the political mill when presidential candidate Clinton claimed–in 2008–that we had dodged sniper fire on that trip.

“I not only had a different memory, but I still had the video from the event and it clearly showed no snipers. In fact, there were children on the runway in Bosnia to greet Clinton. Sheryl Crow was on the trip with us, as was comedian Sinbad (to entertain the US troops). Sinbad, too, pointed out he didn’t recall sniper fire.

“CBS News assigned me to do the story on Clinton’s mistaken memory. When she doubled down the next day, we followed up with a second day story.

“Some analysts said it was the final nail in the coffin that caused her to drop out of the race in 2008, clearing the path for Barack Obama to take the nomination for Democrats. Clinton never fully explained whether she knew she wasn’t telling the truth, or whether she actually somehow believed her own concocted story. She simply explained that she’d been overtired.”

Hillary eventually confessed, if you can call it a confession: “So I made a mistake,” she said. “That happens. It proves I’m human, which you know, for some people, is a revelation.”

And then, on another occasion: “I was sleep-deprived, and I misspoke.”

Made a mistake. Misspoke.

If you landed at an airport, walked across the tarmac without incident, and years later told your friends you dodged sniper fire…would they believe you “misspoke” and “made a mistake” after they learned the truth?

Of course not.

Would they then form a different opinion of you? Of course. But when politicians do this sort of thing, their supporters don’t form a different opinion; they shrug, spin, deny, ignore.

Let’s see. A) Walked across the tarmac and nothing happened. B) Walked across the tarmac and dodged sniper fire. You know, bullets. From rifles. Dodging. Running. Could die any second.

When Brian Williams was caught inventing war stories that never happened, NBC fired him. They had to. He was the face of the news. He was supposed to be above credibility issues.

But when Hillary tells a straightforward lie about snipers, nobody fires her. It’s business as usual. And she could gain a title slightly more important than national news anchor: president of the United States.

Is the sniper lie the biggest Hillary has told? Not by a long shot. But it’s very instructive, because it was about a direct and specific issue of fact that could be contradicted easily by available evidence.

Which raises the question: since it was such a foolish lie to float, why did she go with it?

There are several possible answers:

She felt immune, in general, as people with a certain amount of power do. Untouchable.

She is incapable of separating her lies from the truth.

She misestimated, by a mile, the likelihood that she would get away with lying.

In any of these cases, she would be quite dangerous as a sitting President.

Equally dangerous, perhaps more so, is the public’s perception of her as a viable candidate. That perception is based on a PR profile which has been built for her over the course of many years. For the general public, she is that package.

the matrix revealed

Remember, Hilary Clinton is a champion of psychiatric treatment for the masses. Meanwhile, any psychiatrist with even a minimum of training would view her sniper-lie as a pathological symptom.

She stakes out a position of power relative to a system (psychiatry) that could expose her. This is a reflex reaction, in the same way that a high-level criminal would establish favored status with the Department of Justice.

The mainstream press, of course, shapes its coverage of her in terms of how she is hurting or helping her chances in the race for the Presidency. The idea that these reporters would actually investigate her past with relentless determination is absurd.

She is image, low-level archetype, symbol moving about on the chessboard, adjusting to the needs of the moment; and this grotesque activity is viewed as quite normal for someone who wants political power.

In a half-sane country, she would be ignored as a minor disturbance, like a momentary breeze filled with old leaves and dust and food wrappers.

But she stands on the threshold of the Presidency.

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 29th 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.

Hillary: what she’ll face in the dem debate

Hillary: what she’ll face in the dem debate

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2015

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

“Any politician can skate around tough questions. It’s a primary skill. The usual method is turning a specific question into a general answer. A non-sequitur. But these days, there is another strategy. You could call it the ‘no-catastrophe’ approach. The politician, by word or gesture, implies: ‘If I had done something wrong, there would have been a calamity, but as you can see, there wasn’t; therefore, let’s move along to another topic.’ Or to put it another way: ‘I’m smart, you’re stupid, I have a meeting, goodbye.’” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

In the dem debate, Hillary will face a few tough questions. Translation: It will seem as if she’s being attacked, just to give the impression that things are on the up and up; she’ll skate; she’ll change the subject to “more important matters our great nation must face in the coming months and years.”

Q: What about the email controversy that has engulfed your campaign for the Presidency?

A: Yes, I made a mistake, for which I’ve apologized. However, no serious breach occurred, and I must say there are vital issues we need to discuss here, about our collective future, about the rights of women and of all our people…

Q: Questions have been swirling about your state of health.

A: I assure you, I’m fine. I feel very energized about the coming campaign, and just as I served in the capacity of Secretary of State, traveling the world to defend our national interests, I am quite capable of carrying out the duties of President of the United States.

Essentially, Hillary’s view, for public consumption, is: what’s past is past. Anything that ever happened to her, anything she did is gone and buried. So as she said about Benghazi: “What difference does it make?”

Her record, as far as she’s concerned, is unimportant, except that it’s “admirable and wonderful” and qualifies her for the highest office in the land.

What’s all this nonsense about her specific actions and history? Specifics are distractions. The gloss is everything.

Obama’s brand of gloss put him over the top. So did George Bush’s. So did Bill’s.

Whatever is “good and right and true”—Hillary stands for that. Candidates are impressionists. She is an impressionist, too. End of problem.

Hillary has been aching for a campaign that is a wall-to-wall celebration of her status. There have been some horrible interruptions.

What’s wrong with people? Don’t they want a glorious parade with bands and streamers and shouts of unrestrained joy?

A certain few people rise to a great height in this society, at which point they should be beyond criticism. She is one of those people.

Misdemeanors? Felonies? Those are incorrectly applied labels for “what one needs to do to emerge from the mass” and become known. Everybody knows that.

Candidates are supposed to be walking advertisements for themselves. As a self-advertisement, Hillary is quite a dish. Other envious people have shot her with ashes and fungi and mold and viruses, but that’s not her fault.

She wants to shout from the rooftops: “I’m entitled! I’m entitled to wear the crown!” It’s eating her up that she can’t do it.

She wants to announce: “All you peasants bow before me! I’m the queen!”

In that way, she’s living in the wrong century. She belongs in the Middle Ages, on a throne, with an adoring and fearful court at her feet.

She has that energy, and she’s repressing it, and it’s killing her.

On the campaign trail, in the debates, she has to piddle around with little questions and little answers and fools who don’t understand who and what she is.

That’s where she makes her mistakes. She can’t bring herself to the level where a queen would abdicate her position and respond seamlessly to Lilliputian attacks.

In her psyche, universal rights, equality, political correctness, social justice—all the issues for which she is supposed to be the consummate Left advocate—are idiot soup for the starry-eyed rubes and yokels. She couldn’t care less about any of it. She wants the crown and the scepter and sword.

She wants to grind her enemies under her heel. She wants them to feel her rage.

the matrix revealed

Wrong time, wrong place. And she doesn’t have the gift for smooth unadulterated lying a candidate needs.

She should be a lead in Game of Thrones. Then she could vent her spleen.

But she’s trying to settle for the Presidency.

If she can’t have blood, gore, internecine plots, murder, suicide, incest, land armies with spears, assaults on castles, conflagrations, she’ll try to make do with the Oval Office.

Hillary’s current army of sycophants sees everything in terms of symbols and idols. They have no idea who they’re dealing with. Even if they did, they’d reject what they’re seeing, because it doesn’t match their infantile conception of the “heroic struggle” to impose utopia on America.

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 29th 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.

If this were a Presidential campaign speech

by Jon Rappoport

October 12, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

After a round of applause on the heels of the candidate’s remarks about the hideous effects of Globalism on national economies, he took a sharp turn in the road…

“And let me tell you about energy. You know, the stuff every human in the world consumes every day. The stuff we go to war over, while claiming we’re trying to install democracies. What a lie that is. And we all know it. Major media don’t report it, don’t face up to it, because they’re part of the problem. Does anyone watch the evening network news anymore? I don’t. It emits a putrid smell. A crippling foul stench.

“Anyway, we have alternatives to oil. We have them. People know about them, and they keep them on the shelf.

“For example, how many inlets are there on our coastlines where the high tide and the low tide are at sharp extremes? In each of those places, we could put turbines, and the tides would turn the turbines and produce electricity. It’s ridiculously obvious.

“In fact, JFK was very interested, for decades, in a project like that in Maine. It was called Passamaquoddy. People stopped that from happening. People in America and Canada. It’s quite a story. Look it up.

“You can also put small turbines in many, many rivers and deliver electricity to local communities.

“On a much simpler level, you can manufacture bicycles. You sit on the bike and pedal for an hour, and you produce enough electricity for 24 hours, in a small dwelling. There is a company right now that has them. They have a campaign going called Billions in Change.

“This same company is trying to use a substance called graphene, a marvelous conductor, to build a prototype that will bring heat up from below ground, anywhere on the planet, without energy loss. Heat is energy.

“Remember hydrogen energy? For a while, that was the latest thing. Then, for some reason, it wasn’t. Why? You can split water into oxygen and hydrogen. It isn’t rocket science.

“The point is, our leaders have been paying lip service to the idea of getting off the oil addiction, but they haven’t really done it. They haven’t wanted to do it. No matter what they say, they’re in bed with the oil companies.

“People bring up the issue of ‘cost-effectiveness’. They say, ‘Well yes, there are many alternatives to oil, but right now they’re too expensive to produce. Someday, of course…’ Has anyone stopped to figure out the total amount of government subsidies—I’m talking about tax breaks, loopholes, special favors (criminal collusions), grants, and so on—the government has doled out to Big Oil and Big Nuclear Power over decades and decades? And all of a sudden, when we start talking about real alternatives, there isn’t enough money. Gee whiz, we don’t have any money. That’s a stupendous lie.

“Can you imagine—and I ask you to try, really try—what would happen to the state of mind of the American people, if we went to brilliant energy alternatives and got away from oil? Can you imagine the upsurge of excitement?

“And we’re no longer fighting wars for oil. We’re no longer kissing the asses of certain people who give us oil. We’re not hobbled.

“A Manhattan Project for new energy. Not a fake one. Not a pretense. Not lip service. Not people pretending they’re cutting-edge scientists. No more naysayers. In my administration, all those people would be pumping gas at broken down stations in the desert and selling water at Seven-Elevens. I’d get some real individuals on board. No committees sucking away tax money to turn out some gibberish task force report in six years. No more university freeloaders pontificating and wasting our time.

“Oil companies are free to bring us oil, on their own dime, until somebody can provide energy more cheaply. At which point, I would use the Army, if necessary, to keep the oil companies from trying to enforce their monopoly. How many people would like to watch that confrontation? I would.

“Guess what? New energy is going to come from the private sector, from innovators. It’s not going to come from the government. The government is in the business of protecting oil. The last time I looked, that protection racket isn’t a real business. It isn’t making anything except trouble. I’m sick of those people. Aren’t you?

“See, I’m talking about what you already know, aren’t I? We all know it. I’m now making it part of the news. Energy alternatives are here. Liars and scumbags and the criminals are protecting cartels. We don’t like that. Americans are instinctively opposed to cartels. We want to put them in the dirt, where they belong.

“For that, we would need a real Attorney General. When was the last time America had one of those? I can’t remember. But I assure you, I would appoint one. A tiger. A balls-to-the-walls, fearless, righteous son of a bitch who is on the side of the angels. He would be my guy. He would use his full Constitutional power to crack cartels like walnuts.

“And while I’m at it, what about human energy? You know, that flow that gets you through the day, the energy that’s related to a state of good health? What about that?

“Am I giving you startling news when I say the whole medical cartel, including of course the drug companies, are treating anything that moves as a disease these days? Does that news come as a shock to you? And are you surprised to learn that many of the drugs Americans consume like M&Ms are toxic? Of course not. Everybody knows that now.

“Everybody knows these drug companies and their collaborators are in the business of creating diseases out of every human behavior, so we all look like and become drugged-out eternal patients.

“In the process, what happens to human energy? It’s depleted. Toxic compounds tend to do that, right?

“So why should the whole medical cartel have a monopoly on health care? Why can’t any human make up his own mind about how to become more healthy, more alive? Why can’t he go to any practitioner he chooses? Why is that a crime?

“As President, I assure you this insanity will stop. Doctors will climb into the real world and compete with any sort of practitioner out there, on level ground.

Exit From the Matrix

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

“Anyway, are you people getting the message? Freedom. Lots and lots of freedom. New energy. Better energy. No more robots telling us what we can and can’t do.

“You know what the problem has been? There haven’t been enough of us saying what we think. There haven’t been enough of us giving voice to what we already know. We’ve been in trance listening to a parade of idiots and venal bastards.

“We can create better days. We can do it, I assure you…”

Seconds of silence followed the candidate’s words. In many, many minds, thoughts spun and turned over and ticked, until all at once, it became obvious that, yes, there was this thing called a trance, and we had been in it, and there was another thing called freedom and power, real power, and people were yearning for it, instead of a fake grotesque Mommy and Daddy called The State.

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 29th 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.