Category Archives: Press Fraud

Fakery: major media preparing to steal election-night outcome?

Fakery: major media preparing to steal election-night outcome?

by Jon Rappoport

October 17, 2016

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

Note: this article is about the early projections media outlets make on election night—when they call the winner.

Here it is in a nutshell: major media consider the election a media event.

Therefore, they control it.

Therefore, when they project the election-outcome the night of the vote, even though that call is unofficial, they want compliance from the candidates. THEY WANT A FAST CONCESSION SPEECH from the loser. Well, a concession from Trump, because the networks and their allies in print newspapers are already painting a picture of a Hillary victory (for example, see this WaPo article). The picture is: Trump’s campaign is falling apart, Hillary is leading in battleground states, and she may even expand her reach into states Trump was previously thought to have wrapped up.

On Meet the Press Sunday, Mike Pence was asked point blank: if you lose on election night, will you and Donald concede? And Pence said yes.

The media-concocted story line: if Trump loses and he refuses to concede, because he believes the count was rigged, he’ll be inciting violence and endangering the country.

Of course, the networks calling the election victory is unofficial. It’s all happening in a bubble.

The networks are terrified that Trump will refuse to concede if they say he lost. Instead, he will say: “My team and I have definite knowledge of widespread vote fraud in many states. As I speak, we are filing suits. We not only want an accurate recount, we want criminal charges brought against the vote riggers. We know who they are. Some of the culprits are media networks. You can say I’m a sore loser but I’m not. I’m for fairness, and we don’t have that. We’re going all the way with our accusations and our facts. All along I’ve been saying the system is corrupt. Now we’re going to prove that…”

The media could then be accused of direct complicity in stealing the election.

So…how do the networks decide who wins an election? Buckle up. Here is a concise description from Wikipedia. Notice that the media are basically getting their vote-info from…themselves:

“The National Election Pool (NEP) is a consortium of American news organizations formed in 2003 to provide ‘information on Election Night about the vote count, election analysis and election projections.’ Member companies consist of ABC News, the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News. The organization relies on the Associated Press to perform vote tabulations and contracted with Edison Research and Mitofsky International to ‘make projections and provide exit poll analysis.’ Edison Research has provided this data since 2004.

“The precursor was Voter News Service, which was disbanded in 2003, after controversies over the 2000 and 2002 election results. The NEP plan is largely the suggestion of CNN, which used Edison/Mitofsky as consultants in the past. Mitofsky headed the original pool that preceded VNS.

“The organizers of the pool insist that the purpose of their quick collection of exit poll data is not to determine if an election is flawed, but rather to project winners of races. Despite past problems, they note that none of their members has incorrectly called a winner since the current system was put in place. However, to avoid the premature leaking of data, collection is now done in a ‘Quarantine Room’ at an undisclosed location in New York. All participants are stripped of outside communications devices until it is time for information to be released officially.”

Doesn’t that warm the cockles of your heart and give you great confidence?

Back in 2012, I wrote this about Edison Research and Mitofsky:

“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.”

But wait. Even though media giants are getting their election-night info from themselves, they must be basing that info on actual vote counts in the 50 states, as reported by the secretaries of states. Right? Read the last two paragraphs again. The exit polls differed greatly from the vote counts.

And remember, if widespread electronic vote fraud occurs on election night (read my previous piece on the crooked GEMS vote-tabulating system used across the US in 25% of the vote), the early media projections of a Presidential winner will serve to cut off any doubt about, or investigation into, the veracity of the GEMS system.

power outside the matrix

“Well, there it is, America. All networks are now projecting the winner. We are waiting for a concession speech from the loser…”

Between now and election night, expect pressure to build on Trump to concede if/when he loses…

“In our American democracy, a peaceful transition from one President to the next is the hallmark of our stability. If Mr. Trump refuses to play by the rules, he is a clear and present danger…”

Trump goes on national television and refuses to concede. Instead, he calls the vote-count a criminal act and has his lawyers file numerous suits.

Then, precisely timed, George Soros-funded riots break out in key cities. Amid the destruction, the media blame Trump for the violence. It’s all his fault. He’s the great divider.

Lifted by strong arms from her wheelchair, pumped up on God knows what drugs, Hillary walks out on stage in a large hall, before screaming adoring fans, and with eyes glowing and a huge smile pasted on her face, gives a speech about a new era in America, and how she will heal wounds and help restore unity and opportunity for all…

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Major media build a universe for Hillary

Major media build a universe for Hillary

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2016

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

The other day I wandered over to the New York Times to see what their front page looked like.

My, my. It was another universe.

Nothing about the pounding Hillary took in the second debate. Nothing about the latest email leaks showing extreme collusion between Hillary’s camp and the mainstream press. Nothing about Bill’s rape accusers taking front and center. Nothing about Hillary threatening those accusers. Nothing about Hillary’s role in creating ISIS. Nothing about election pollsters contributing to the Clinton Foundation. Nothing about outrage among FBI agents and DOJ attorneys after failure to prosecute Hillary in the email server crime—thus allowing her to continue her run for the Presidency. Nothing about her failing health. Nothing about polls (that show a Hillary lead) slanted by oversampling Democrats. Nothing about Hillary hiding out once again and avoiding press and public.

Instead, in this alternate NY Times universe, Trump’s campaign was falling apart. He was singlehandedly destroying the Republican Party and endangering upcoming Senate and House races. Hillary’s poll numbers were in good shape and her campaign was moving in the direction of an expected victory. And to top it off, one of the Times’ potato-head columnists burped out an op-ed about Trump’s “sad, lonely world.”

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

After I recovered, my first thought was: The Times is running cover for a vote-rig on election night: “As expected, Hillary Clinton cruised to an easy victory, sweeping nearly 30 states…”

I’m sure the headlines are already composed and the lead paragraphs are already written.

After that, I began thinking about major media companies, reporters, and pollster outfits contributing to the Clinton Foundation. What’s actually going on here? Cooking the news for Hillary is one thing; but why take the risk of actually delivering money to the Clintons?

You would only do something so egregious if you believed Hillary and Bill had accumulated a tremendous amount of power; if you were overtly signaling your loyalty to the King and Queen.

A few facts do, indeed, suggest such royal power.

Hillary has managed to position herself as the face and heart and soul of the Democratic Party. That is no small feat.

Hillary was able to maneuver an attack against Libya that eviscerated the whole country and sent it down into horrific chaos—and she was able to avoid any official blame for it.

Her Foundation has run a multi-billion-dollar, global, money-laundering machine for 20 years, during which time big donors have been accorded special economic and political favors—including the mind-bending permission to sell 20% of US uranium to Russia. The Foundation is, in essence, a new arm of the federal government. No federal agency has investigated it. The players and donors involved in the Foundation have such international clout, exposure of the game would set off a scandal making Watergate look like a pimple on the face of a cockroach living in another galaxy.

And here, perhaps, we have the core of the situation. The Clintons have always known that cash makes the winners and losers. And so they have become grand facilitators. Greasers of wheels. You want to get things done, law or no law? Go to the fixers and their Foundation. You want governments to give you contracts and concessions? Mining rights? Pharmaceutical sales? Disaster-aid monopoly? Pay to play through the Foundation. There is a slick pipeline for fast action. And it operates under the cover of a charity. Everybody’s doing it. Don’t worry, it’ll never be prosecuted. It’s too big and too dirty to fail. Oil billionaires are on board. National governments and presidents are on board. Mega-corporations are on board. Other charities are hooked in.

Just one example: Through the Foundation, friends of Bill Clinton cashed in on US government contracts (the pie to be cut up was $10 billion) to “help Haiti” in the wake of the 2010 earthquake. Human-aid experience? Know-how? Irrelevant. The whole scam looked like it was legit, coming through the US State Department, headed by Hillary, but it was really a Foundation operation. Who was helped? Mostly, the friends of Bill. Who was left out in the cold? The Haitians.

Major media outfits are basically saying to Hillary and Bill: “Look, too much information about the Foundation is leaking. We have to cover it. But we’ll never directly link you to it, Hillary. Your Presidential campaign is safe. We promise. Remember our little donation to the Foundation? Take that as a sign of our good faith.”

By now, the mainstream press could have blasted Hillary to smithereens re the Foundation’s crimes. Her campaign would be in smoking ruins. Her familiar pleas of “I didn’t know” would be falling on deaf ears all across the America. But it hasn’t happened.

The press is betting they can hold things together for her through Election Day. And they want to, because they still believe she and Bill are where the power is. It’s too late not to believe it. Bury all doubt, full steam ahead, pretend her campaign is on track, keep slamming Trump, and hope and pray.

Behind all this is the knowledge, fully grasped, that the Globalist agenda is at stake. Remaking the world as one economic and political order, under one elite management system—this is Hillary’s mantra. This is her mandate. This is her goal. Nothing can be allowed to derail the mission.

Now we are talking about the power behind, and far above, the Clinton throne. Major media are the propaganda arm of Globalism. That’s engraved in granite.

power outside the matrix

If Jeb Bush had been running against Hillary, as envisioned, then the press could have played a lot harder against Hillary, because Jeb is her Globalist cousin, and it would have made no difference who won.

But suddenly, the cowboy strolled into the saloon with his mouth on Go. Trump showed up.

With Jeb huddling in a corner, in a puddle of tears, sucking his thumb, Hillary and Bill didn’t have to worry about the press going after them. She was the only Globalist on the ticket. She would therefore catch a major break.

All would be well, and it was, until Trump’s numbers and supporters took off like 4th of July rockets.

Now the media have resolved to stay the course the rest of the way, even if it means Hillary’s aides will be dragging her fading carcass across the threshold of the Oval Office and propping her in the chair behind the Queen Victoria Resolute Desk, after the swearing-in ceremony on January 20, 2017.

To this end, they continue to build a universe for her. Synthetic, hermetically sealed.

Its typical fake name is: We Find No Smoking Gun.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Election: Life against Death in the mind control machine of politics and media

Election: Life against Death in the mind control machine of politics and media

by Jon Rappoport

October 11, 2016

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

When I first started writing about Donald Trump, I hammered on the fact that he was opposing the media and winning—and I said if he didn’t accomplish anything else along his swaggering path, that alone would be an unprecedented shocker. A major Presidential candidate putting the press in its place and not backing off.

I wrote that from 30 years of experience in the news business. So my perspective is deeper than average.

These execrable talking heads and print reporters of the mainstream are quite insane, you know—or they would be if they weren’t so sly. Their game is all about getting away with lying, with putting people’s attention on the wrong part of the story. They’re little demons who take delight in deceiving the public.

And THAT’S why they like the standard brand of political candidate. They all went to the same school. They all come from the same shit heap. They all wink and nudge and build the same fake sand castles and laugh about it. “Look, we fooled the idiots again.” The idiots, of course, being the public.

This is who the press is. Forget their pose of honesty. It’s a sham. They’re the tricksters. This is how they obtain their energy.

THEY SEE NO OTHER WAY TO FIND ENERGY.

That’s the key.

Finding energy is central to the life of an individual. Any individual.

In countless articles and talks, I emphasize PURE IMAGINATION as the profound source OF ENERGY AND INSPIRATION and POWER.

For the denizens of the press, it’s deception. It’s the glee of falsification. Knowing they have an audience whose minds they can twist into pretzels.

Trump essentially came along and said, “You’re a pack of idiots and everybody knows it. I’m breaking the hypnotic spell.”

Love him, hate him—that’s what he did. He fired many torpedoes into their bellies.

The denizens of the press also hate life. They’ve hated it from a young age, when they somehow came to the conclusion that feeling and experiencing life was impossible for them. And by life I mean, once again, energy. THE ENERGY WITHIN. Cut off from that, they decided to ruin and deface life wherever they could find it. Cleverly. Secretly. Successfully. In REVENGE.

In all my writing, underneath the issues, this is what I’m talking about. The authentic power of an individual who can and does sense and feel and use and project THE ENERGY WITHIN.

THIS is a road to travel. This is a spiritual and physical and mental and emotional path. This is the opposite of mind control.

Let me give you a glimpse of the opposite path, highly favored by the press and politicians. This is a revealing quote from Wikipedia. Read the whole thing:

“Woodward and Bernstein’s exposé All the President’s Men reports that many staffers who had attended the University of Southern California such as Donald Segretti, Tim Elbourne, Ronald Louis Ziegler, H. R. Haldeman and Dwight Chapin had participated in the highly-competitive student elections there. UPI reporter Karlyn Barker sent Woodward and Bernstein a memo “Notes On the USC Crowd” that outlined the connection. Fraternities, sororities and underground fraternal coordinating organizations such as Theta Nu Epsilon and their splintered rival “Trojans for Representative Government” engaged in creative tricks and underhanded tactics to win student elections. Officially, control over minor funding and decision-making on campus life was at stake but the positions also gave bragging rights and prestige.”

Get it?

Exit From the Matrix

Now here is the fabulous capper to the Wikipedia quote:

“It [the dirty tricks and cheating] was either promoted by or garnered the interest of major political figures on the USC board of trustees such as Dean Rusk and John A. McCone. It was here that the term ratfucking had its origin.”

Ratfucking. For glee and fun and deception. And the prestigious adults on the USC board—John McCone (head of the CIA—covert ops and dirty tricks taken to a new level) and Dean Rusk (Secretary of State)—promoted, or were intensely interested in, ratfucking.

“Go get them, kids!”

“Cold? Cut off from life? Nowhere to go? Want revenge against the world and life itself? Join the guild of RATFUCKERS. We understand. We have branch offices all over the world. We are in the press and we are in politics. We are the best and the brightest. We make wars for no reason. We giggle and laugh at the dire pain we visit on the heads of others. Step up to the big leagues, kids. Gaze at the pictures of the men on our walls. Some of the most famous figures, present and past. And now you are the future…”

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 rise of the deplorables

The rise of the deplorables

by Jon Rappoport

October 11, 2016

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

Something is happening in America.

Against all odds, people are seeing a coming dawn. In the darkness, new hope. And this hope is not being manufactured. This is not Obama hope. This is not sly wickedness. This is not wretchedness in disguise. This is not hate and revenge wearing a mask of share and care.

This is what happens, rarely, when millions of decent people have reached the end of their rope. When their common sense about what is being done to destroy their country and their lives will not be denied. Will not be denied.

The Clinton bandwagon of evil is coming apart. She, the one Clinton, is sputtering vapid generalities for all to see, as the programmed machine in her head is running down. The batteries are failing. The archetype of the android with a forever smile is a ghastly mechanical sight.

He, the other Clinton, is taking bitter, bitter medicine. There he was, on television screens across the world, rammed into his seat, frozen in a cold stare at his enemies, who are no longer so afraid of him they huddle in anonymity. The remaining shreds of his self-constructed dignity are being torn away from him in a cyclone of accusation.

They, the minions of the press, are raging in their own nightmare. Dedicated to the Clinton apparatus, and the crimes for which it stands, these mob foot soldiers are running a high fever. Whoever this outrageous businessman leading the charge is, they must destroy him. And time is running out. They have sold their souls, and the balloon payment is coming due.

Herds of so-called progressive Americans, who would take psychopathic murderers into their homes if it would prove their virtue, who are terrified of discovering their own bankrupt pretensions—“oh I am good, I swear on my life I am good”—are trembling. What is happening to their cartoon world? The bubbles are exploding.

Evil money from lizard scum is being poured into an effort to start a civil war in America. To rip America apart. But suddenly, there is the prospect of the center holding. Men and women of good will are finding their footing and their voices. This election is just one milestone along a road that is being shaped day by day.

Exit From the Matrix

America is not a lacerated piece in a board game of global control. America is still its own. Is still a living dream.

The ghouls who recoil in horror at glimpsing this dream are moving to the edge of the pit, where they seek power from the abyss. But the abyss is remorseless and has no pity. It swallows whatever and whoever comes to it.

Once, America’s grand poet, Walt Whitman, sang of the open road, and the freedom that blossomed along its endless course.

These songs never die.

There is no final curtain.

Against all odds, the deplorables are rising.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

High Alert: the election can still be rigged

High Alert: the election can still be rigged

Votes counted as fractions instead of as whole numbers

by Jon Rappoport

October 10, 2016

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

I’m reposting this piece because, amazingly, the vote-rigging system it describes has not gotten widespread attention. The system can be used across the entire US.

As we know, there are a number of ways to rig an election. Bev Harris, at blackboxvoting.org, is exploring a specific “cheat sheet” that has vast implications for the Trump vs. Hillary contest.

It’s a vote-counting system called GEMS.

I urge you to dive into her multi-part series, Fraction Magic (Part-1 here). Here are key Harris quotes. They’re all shockers:

“Our testing [of GEMS] shows that one vote can be counted 25 times, another only one one-thousandth of a time, effectively converting some votes to zero.”

“This report summarizes the results of our review of the GEMS election management system, which counts approximately 25 percent of all votes in the United States. The results of this study demonstrate that a fractional vote feature is embedded in each GEMS application which can be used to invisibly, yet radically, alter election outcomes by pre-setting desired vote percentages to redistribute votes. This tampering is not visible to election observers, even if they are standing in the room and watching the computer. Use of the decimalized vote feature is unlikely to be detected by auditing or canvass procedures, and can be applied across large jurisdictions in less than 60 seconds.”

“GEMS vote-counting systems are and have been operated under five trade names: Global Election Systems, Diebold Election Systems, Premier Election Systems, Dominion Voting Systems, and Election Systems & Software, in addition to a number of private regional subcontractors. At the time of this writing, this system is used statewide in Alaska, Connecticut, Georgia, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Utah and Vermont, and for counties in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. It is also used in Canada.”

“Instead of ‘1’ the vote is allowed to be 1/2, or 1+7/8, or any other value that is not a whole number.”

“Weighting a race [through the use of GEMS] removes the principle of ‘one person-one vote’ to allow some votes to be counted as less than one or more than one. Regardless of what the real votes are, candidates can receive a set percentage of votes. Results can be controlled. For example, Candidate A can be assigned 44% of the votes, Candidate B 51%, and Candidate C the rest.”

“All evidence that [rigged] fractional values ever existed [in the GEMS system] can be removed instantly even from the underlying database using a setting in the GEMS data tables, in which case even instructing GEMS to show the [rigged] decimals will fail to reveal they were used.”

“Source code: Instructions to treat votes as decimal values instead of whole numbers [i.e., rigging] are inserted multiple times in the GEMS source code itself; thus, this feature cannot have been created by accident.”

A contact who, so far, apparently wishes to remain anonymous states the following about the history of the GEMS system:

“The Fractional vote [rigging] portion traces directly to Jeffrey W. Dean, whose wife was primary stockholder of the company that developed GEMS. He ran the company but was prohibited from handling money or checks due to a criminal conviction for computer fraud, for which he spent 4 years in prison. Almost immediately after being released from prison he was granted intimate access to elections data and large government contracts for ballot printing and ballot processing.”

power outside the matrix

I see no effort on the part of the federal government, state governments, or the mainstream press to investigate the GEMS system or respond to Bev Harris’ extensive analysis.

It’s not as if media outlets are unaware of her. From shesource.org, here is an excerpt from her bio:

“Harris has been referred to as ‘the godmother’ of the election reform movement. (Boston Globe). Vanity Fair magazine credits her with founding the movement to reform electronic voting. Time Magazine calls her book, Black Box Voting, ‘the bible’ of electronic voting… Harris’s investigations have led some to call her the ‘Erin Brockovich of elections.’ (Salon.com)… Harris has supervised five ‘hack demonstrations’ in the field, using real voting machines. These have been covered by the Associated Press, the Washington Post, and in formal reports by the United States General Accounting Office…”

So far, her analysis of GEMS seems to be labeled “too hot to handle.” Press outlets prefer to report the slinging of mud from both Presidential candidates’ camps. Meanwhile, the actual results of the coming elections—including Congressional races—appear to be up for grabs, depending on who controls GEMS.

Update: From what I understand, each state government appoints a “consultant” to manage GEMS on election night. That person would be capable of rigging the vote.

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.

Part 2: The secret political issue: Health freedom

Part 2: The secret political issue: Health Freedom

A call from the wilderness

by Jon Rappoport

October 3, 2016

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

For Part 1, and, for the backstory regarding the re-posting of this two part series, click here.

(NOVEMBER 10, 2010) Millions of advocates of health freedom see that no major political candidate, with one or two exceptions, voices their concerns or stands up for their right to improve their health by any and all self-chosen methods.

To understand the landscape in which this deafening silence continues, we need to realize that the one industry which could and should make a difference—the nutritional supplement sector—is dominated by ostriches.

Once a powerful voice for health freedom, the industry has stepped back into the shadows. It nurtures the illusion that it is safe from government intervention. It even supposes it has sufficient allies within the government to stave off attacks by the FDA.

Since 1993, I have been calling for the creation of a powerful “PR wing” funded by nutritional companies. This group would dedicate itself to obtaining ongoing media coverage, showing that nutrition scores many victories in preserving and expanding health, that nutrition is a brilliant success.

At first glance, this may not seem very important. But, in fact, it is THE vital way to turn public, media, and political opinion to the side of nutrition.

The FDA and other government bodies see no reason to curtail their attacks on nutritional supplements if the media aren’t even covering the issue.

Every PR campaign works toward a tipping point, where the very idea of opposing its goals is politically suicidal.

If you don’t understand that, you know nothing about PR.

And what is a campaign? Is it a one-time promotion? Is it a vaguely flailing effort to marshal support? Is it a token outreach? For amateurs, perhaps. For dreamers.

But the reality is far different. A campaign is a well-funded, sustained, and highly organized operation, aimed at gradually creating a shift in widespread perception.

In this case, the campaign TELLS THE TRUTH. That is its weapon. That is its intrinsic strength.

NUTRITION WORKS.

Media outlets, editors, reporters are always looking for interesting stories. The brutal fact of life is, they need copy to fill space and time. They must have it.

What about a boy in Arkansas who was ill for three years, unable to learn or play with his friends, who was brought back from the brink by supplements?

Is that a story?

You bet it is.

What about a husband who had to quit his job and go on the dole, because he no longer had the strength to put in eight hours in a factory? And then he regained his strength with nutrients. Is that a story? It sure is.

Does a fledgling PR campaign start from the top of the media chain? Does a story suddenly appear on the front page of The New York Times? In a fantasy world, perhaps.

No, you build up your book of clippings. You gradually move up the ladder.

You establish a foothold. You lay a firm foundation.

You find experts who will give you favorable and truthful quotes.

You shove in your chips for the long haul, and you don’t back out because you wish paradise would come tomorrow.

On the other side of this PR campaign, you tell the truth about your target, your opponent, your nemesis, your threat. The FDA.

You build up an accurate dossier documenting the widespread damage this agency had done over the years. And it’s there, believe me. For the past 20 years, I’ve been finding it and reporting it.

FDA-certified drugs have been killing American citizens at the rate of 100,000 a year. That’s a good place to start. (Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000; “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

You put your opponent, your threat back on its heels. You force it to play defense. Instead of trying to limit people’s access to supplements, the agency is busy warding off truthful, pointed attacks.

You obtain the right, correct, and honest coverage of the FDA in the press. On an ongoing basis.

This is the double-pronged PR campaign. There is much more to say about it, but you get the idea.

You want politicians to aggressively support health freedom? You have to show them they would have public opinion on their side. And how do you do that? You obtain TRUTHFUL media coverage.

Coverage isn’t accomplished by waving a magical wand. It’s done through PR.

Over the years, since I ran, in 1994, for a Congressional seat in Los Angeles on the issue of health freedom, I’ve seen the most haphazard, amateurish, wasteful, silly, and delusional PR launched out there, in the stratosphere, on behalf of health freedom. Drunken men with no tools would have a better chance of building a mansion than this kind of demented PR would have in congealing public opinion.

This must change. The nutritional industry must come into the 20th, and then the 21st century.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the basic ideal of individual freedom is under assault from many quarters. Health freedom will not escape this net.

Something EFFECTIVE needs to be done.

Read my long interview with brilliant constitutional attorney, Jonathan Emord of Emord and Associates. He spells out what the FDA is doing and planning to do to nutritional supplements in this country.

Jonathan explains the situation in detail.

Naysayers out there will give you a litany of reasons why the media will never cover health freedom or the massive success of nutritional supplements. “Media ad space is dominated by drug companies.” “Media are controlled by the government.” “Medical power is too great.”

I’ve heard all the excuses. Mostly, they are offered by people who refuse to believe any good change can happen in any sphere. But the fundamental flaw in their arguments lies in a complete misunderstanding about the way PR works.

Here is the secret. Most PR DOES work. If the people behind it are smart, if they have money, if they put in the time and the effort, if they aren’t scared away by a few failures, they will come out on top.

Every PR campaign knocks its head on the ceiling many times. “We can’t break through!” “They won’t listen to us!”

You complain, and then you roll up your sleeves and keep going. Because the goal is worth it. Because you truly want the desired end result. And because PR works.

The Matrix Revealed

When I began writing as a reporter almost 30 years ago, I knew nothing about the business. I quickly learned that media need copy. That was the basic reality. Media need stories. They will respond.

PR works the same way. You dig in for the long haul, and you gain success.

Of course, the other advantage of an excellent PR campaign is, no one person has to stick his neck out and take the heat. Instead a whole industry is involved. “You want a battle? Then come after all of us.”

Then can you imagine how the millions of people who buy those supplements would appear in full view, ready to stake their claim for freedom?

In the early 1990s, this is exactly what happened. A few nutritional executives bankrolled a massive outreach program, enlisting American citizens, who wrote millions of letters to Congress demanding a new law protecting supplements.

Congressional sponsors were lined up. They felt confident because the outcry from citizens was huge. The law was passed. It didn’t offer us the guarantees we really needed, but it was better than nothing.

Now we need more. Better laws, and also a PR campaign that doesn’t fold up its tent just because the Congress moved in a somewhat positive direction.

This time, we may need all those citizens to write to supplement companies demanding their action. I have sketched out that action in this article.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Lester Holt: android, wisdom figure, computer brain

Lester Holt: android, wisdom figure, computer brain

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2016

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

Others have pointed out how many times debate moderator Lester Holt slanted criticism toward Trump, rather than Hillary. Others have suggested Hillary and Holt were a tag-team, with Hillary throwing hand signals to Holt indicating she was ready to hit Trump with a zinger.

On a different level…

Watching the debate-host, Holt, working his way through Trump vs. Hillary, sitting in his chair, bathed in a spotlight glow against a sea of total darkness, eerie metallic glimmers reflecting from his glasses, I was reminded of Dr. Eldon Tyrell, the barely human chairman of the corporation that designed androids in the film Blade Runner.

—Holt, the man who had the script and the questions and the facts at his immediate disposal. The brain. The wisdom figure. The synthetic guide with a touch of humanity built in.

Quite an archetype.

As I pointed out recently, the ridiculous notion of a debate with a moderator is modern. When Lincoln and Douglas famously debated slavery for hours at a time, over the course of several weeks, there was no intermediary voice. One man spoke for an hour, and then the other man spoke for an hour.

The moderator is a prop, a pretense of introducing objectivity into the proceeding.

The moderator is the “voice of rationality,” as it were. From that perch, he can, of course, slant the event—and Holt certainly did.

His dry speech patterns, in fact, resembled those of Barack Obama, when the President is reciting script.

Watching Holt operate, I was also reminded of the technocratic wet dream of a human brain hooked up to a computer, from which emanates undeniable wisdom.

Holt adopted the persona of a machine, and he pulled it off.

Which means? This is where the world is heading, if the technocrats have anything to say about it. You “need the best data—and one day soon you’ll get the data from a computer your brain is connected to. All will be well.”

Holt is also NBC’s national news anchor, which means he tells the stories of our time, every night, to millions of tranced viewers who are seeking a voice not their own.

Anchor and debate moderator—a powerful combination.

Hypnotically commanding.

Replay the debate moment when, out of nowhere, Holt’s words suddenly crackled like dry autumn leaves: “[Stop and frisk] was ruled unconstitutional.”

The narrator thus spake.

A brain not their own…a voice not their own…a narrator of reality…a fount of instant wisdom…the answer from on high…there are many, many people who want those things, and they want them embodied in a machine-like structure that assures them of dispassionate “honesty.”

Holt provided.

It’s no surprise that giant television networks have made these debates their own property. After all, the companies consider the events media-moments. Hosting them and appointing the moderators is no different from designing and presenting the nightly news broadcasts.

Of course, when you stop and think about this arrangement for debates, it’s absurd. Why would Lester Holt be more qualified to guide the proceeding than a car mechanic from Peoria?

Why have a guide at all?

Why allow media companies or government entities or even non-profit organizations a place in the debates? The two ruling political parties are the correct sponsors. We’re watching their candidates.

Holt was a well-groomed device. A hint of the near-future. A figure of “just-enough-authority” sitting in the darkness, dispensing voice-of-god to the masses, backed up by a production crew with split-screen, miced-up, podium-on-stage technology to provide a fatuous imitation of a real debate.

Instead, let there be a stage in a glen. Two or three television cameras. Let there be a topic. Foreign policy. Hillary ascends the stage and speaks for an hour. Then she leaves. Trump appears. He talks for 90 minutes. Then Hillary comes back for 30 minutes. The candidates never speak to each other. There is no moment-to-moment exchange of daggers or jokes or gotchas. This isn’t entertainment. It isn’t grins or hair or dress or tie or teeth.

If there is a moderator, he stands down off-stage and to the side, grumpy and frowning, holding an umbrella in case it rains. He reads a book while the candidates speak, he eats a hot dog. He combs and re-combs his hair. He waits. He thinks about his 20-dollar-an-hour salary. He must remain absolutely silent.

He’s an actual prop put there to remind people of a time when things were different, when the so-called news was delivered by media stars, who competed to see which ones were the most clever at inventing reality that seemed factual, but wasn’t.

In a world with a shred of sanity, that’s what Lester Holt would be doing.

Exit From the Matrix

What is modern television news (including debate moderation)?

From their perch, anchors can deign to allow a trickle of sympathy here, a slice of compassion there.

But they let the audience know that objectivity is their central mission. “We have to get the story right.” “You can rely on us for that.”

This is the great PR arch of national network news. “These facts are what’s really happening and we’re giving them to you.” The networks spend untold millions to convey that false assurance.

The anchor is the narrative voice of his time, for all people everywhere. The voice that replaces what is going on in the heads of his audience—all those doubts and confusions and objections in the heads of the great unwashed. The anchor will replace those and substitute his own plot line.

The network anchor is The Wizard Of Is. He keeps explaining what is. “Here’s something that is, and then over here we have something else that is, and now, just in, a new thing that is.” He lays down miles of “is-concrete” to pave over deeper, uncomfortable, unimaginable truth.

The anchor must become comfortable with having very little personality of his own. On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.

Essentially, the anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?”

All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion.

The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor great. Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow.

The public expects to hear that vibrating string. It’s been conditioned by many hard nights at the tube, watching the news.

There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”

Neutrality gives assurance that everything is under control.

Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re like a responsible charity.

The other night, Lester Holt was the machine-like agent of the Cosmic Charity of All Souls dedicated to higher wisdom from an unimpeachable source. That was his role and he played it.

“I take no sides. I have no opinions. I am objectivity personified. I am…The Fact Checker.”

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.

Winner of last night’s debate was Lester Holt

Winner of last night’s debate was Lester Holt

by Jon Rappoport

September 27, 2016

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

As I wrote before the debate yesterday, it’s all about the staging.

I won’t go over everything NBC moderator Lester Holt did to tilt the debate to Hillary. Others are covering his performance. I’ll point out one vital thing. It happened right at the beginning.

Holt framed the debate by stating that the US economy, particularly employment, has recovered well since the 2007-8 meltdown. Of course, he lied. When you factor in how many people now have low-paying jobs who formerly had good jobs; and when you also consider that people who give up trying to find jobs are eventually no longer listed as unemployed, you get the true picture: the US economy hasn’t recovered. Not by a long shot.

Understandably, Trump was focused, at the moment when Holt lied, on Hillary and the audience in the hall. He was blindsided. From the get-go, he should have pinned Holt and denied Holt’s “facts.” He should have exposed Holt as an errant “fact-checker” and put him back on his heels. That could have changed the whole tone of the evening. Holt’s stone-faced “objective” calm would have been broken. He would have been under the gun.

The tight debate format does not suit Trump. The whole set-up goes against his style. Brief statements, the back-and-forth between candidates, the moderator questions and interruptions—it plays against his energy and rhythms.

Within that structure, Trump tended to talk to Hillary and Holt—instead of directly to the American people.

That created problems for him throughout the evening.

Trump’s whole campaign has been based on him going out there, from city to city, talking to large crowds.

In the debates, he has to maintain that position. He’s still speaking directly to the American people, even though he’s in a small hall, with network coverage, with Hillary standing near him, with a media moderator running the show. He has to make that clear—he’s speaking to The People.

The debate set-up is 2 against 1. Holt (or any network moderator) is the anchor. Hillary, with her polished delivery (she’s spoken these lines hundreds of times), functions, in a sense, as another anchor. That leaves Trump as the “disgruntled guest” on the show, trying to make his points and go against the grain.

Exit From the Matrix

An old word describes what Trump should be doing: “oratory.” It’s what elevates a speaker beyond his immediate circumstances and environment, imparting the sense that he’s talking to “everybody.” Forget Hillary. Forget Holt. Forget the people in the hall. Many of them are political pros. Talk to America.

Trump is supposed to be a populist. He’s supposed to be speaking to, and on behalf of, the citizens who feel they have no voice. If that’s true, he can’t leave them out during the debates.

For her part, Hillary was sheer empty perfection. She used all the buzzwords and generalities, while maintaining a cheery and bright attitude. She delivered exactly what she’s been delivering for years and years, straight from memory.

It doesn’t matter what the debate after-polls show. As this campaign moves to its final moments, her anchor-like gloss is going to make serious inroads on Trump, if he continues to be the disgruntled guest on the show.

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.

Tonight’s debate: watch the staging

Tonight’s debate: watch the staging

Every television newscast: staged reality

by Jon Rappoport

September 26, 2016

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

Watch how tonight’s Trump-Hillary debate is set up.

Are the two podiums the same size? No? Who has the bigger podium?

Is the lighting even, or are there shadows? Where do the shadows fall?

Is there blue color in the background, which exudes a “calming effect?”

How is the moderator, Lester Holt, lit? Is he spotlighted, haloed, to impart the sense that he’s the ultimate authority in the room?

What about camera angles on the two candidates? Are they receiving the same coverage, or is one more prominent? Are there close-ups?

Will cameras impart a sense of distance, in order to reduce dramatic effect and give the impression that the whole event is somewhat monotonous?

Will the audience be allowed to applaud and boo, or will Lester Holt control that?

To what degree will the candidates be allowed to wander off-topic? Will the reins be tight or loose?

How much time will each candidate be given to make statements? Will either or both of them be pinched, so they can’t say anything of substance?

Ah yes, substance. Context. Network news is famous for thin context:

The news is all about artificially manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time…

Let’s consider some general background on the news:

The network evening news. This is where the staging is done well.

First, we have the image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style. The overall effect: hypnotic, yet stimulating.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald’s. His report would be identical.

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: “Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations…”

The viewer fills in the (thin) context for the story: “Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they’re not. These people are always arguing with each other. They don’t agree. They’re in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows.”

The anchor: “The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized…”

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: “Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot.”

The anchor: “A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition, and this trend has jumped quickly since the recent school-shooting tragedy…”

The viewer: “People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don’t need a gun. The police have guns.”

The anchor: “Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism…”

Viewer: “That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain.”

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he’d learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

It would never occur to him to wonder: are the squabbling political legislators really two branches of the same Party? Does government have the Constitutional right to incur this much debt? Where is all that money coming from? Taxes? Other sources? Who invents money?

Is the flu dangerous for most people? If not, why not? Do governments overstate case numbers? How do they actually test patients for the flu? Are the tests accurate? Are they just trying to convince us to get vaccines?

What happens when the government has overwhelming force and citizens have no guns?

When researchers keep saying “may” and “could,” does that mean they’ve actually discovered something useful about autism, or are they just hyping their own work and trying to get funding for their next project?

power outside the matrix

These are only a few of the many questions the typical viewer never considers.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin—night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is: small viewer, small viewer’s mind, small viewer’s understanding.

The average viewer, having been entrained through years of watching the news, is going to come to tonight’s Presidential debate ready for thin context and no depth.

That’s the subconscious expectation.

Can this expectation be reversed in 90 minutes, regardless of what either candidate says?

And if either candidate suddenly punches a hole in that expectation, will the average viewer welcome it, or will he feel shocked and disturbed by the intrusion? Will he resent it?

Or to put it another way, which candidate more closely resembles a network news anchor—the familiar words, the familiar generalities, the thin context.

The networks that will broadcast the debate consider it a media/news event.

They will try to keep it within that space.

They think they own that space, which includes the viewer’s mind.

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.

How the liberal press will game the Trump-Hillary debate

How the liberal press will game the Trump-Hillary debate

—assuming Hillary shows up—

by Jon Rappoport

September 25, 2016

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

I didn’t invent the liberal press. If the MSM were overwhelmingly conservative, I’d be writing about how they’re going to game Monday night’s debate.

Here’s the problem the MSM faces. Most Presidential debates are snoozefests during which the two candidates float high-flying, empty, vapid, brainless generalities. The press can then easily pick their favorite person, in the aftermath, because neither one said anything. But here we have something different:

Trump is famous for potent wise cracks; dismissive comments aimed at his opponents and the media; and sharp-tongued critiques of policies (e.g., Globalism) which are never aired during election campaigns. He’s a fast-talking cowboy who starts shooting as he’s walks through the door of the saloon.

So the MSM will have to scramble, to slant perception away from Trump and for Hillary.

It’s quite possible that, during the debate itself, a little army of liberal fact-checkers will analyze a Trump statement, decide it’s false, and relay the information to Lester Holt, the moderator, who will frame an accusatory question for Trump on the spot, hoping to catch him up and expose him.

Holt may also try to pop Trump for interrupting Hillary; portraying him as a rude, over-weaning, coarse jackass.

And if Hillary criticizes Trump on a foreign policy issue, and he comes back with one of his patented bombs—“You should talk, Hillary, you destroyed Libya and turned it into a hellhole”—Holt could insist Trump is going off the reservation and not replying directly to Hillary.

“Mr. Trump, I keep trying to bring you back to the subject at hand, and you keep wandering away from it…” (The MSM would replay that clip hundreds of times.)

Holt could do a lot of things to try to upset Trump’s rhythm and tempo and cast him in a negative light. You can bet Hillary’s people have been sending messages through to Holt, urging him to keep Trump on-topic, “so the debate doesn’t turn into an unseemly circus.”

Post-debate, the liberal press will certainly refrain from mentioning that many of Hillary’s remarks were substanceless generalities (her stock-in-trade). They’ll actually fill in the blanks for her. They always have.

If Hillary shows up and endures the full 90 minutes, without collapsing or leaving the stage in a coughing fit, the liberal press will automatically claim “she looked strong and fit” and her health is not a problem. “Apparently, those questions have been answered.”

If Hillary energetically pushes back against Trump just once, during the whole evening, even if she’s telling an egregious lie in the process, the MSM will seize on it, play it over and over, and crow about her “toughness.”

If Trump decides to tone it down and look and sound “Presidential,” the MSM will say he was “subdued” and off his game. If he attacks, they’ll say he was “un-Presidential,” as well as “sexist.”

If Hillary physically survives the debate, the MSM will say she’s “on track” to becoming the next President, “as the polls have indicated, despite Trump’s recent surge.” In other words, they’ll try to make it look as if she’s been running a seamless and successful campaign all along, based on her “vast experience”—instead of ducking reporters, hiding out, canceling events, and trying to find enough energy to carry on.

If Trump stumbles at any point, the MSM will punch that up, highlight it, run the clip over and over, and claim it shows he’s really unprepared for “the major leagues.” “He was exposed.” “He’s really an amateur, as many critics have warned all along.”

As usual, based on zero evidence, the MSM will claim Hillary played well to certain voting blocs: the young, unions, minorities, the elderly.

Any sort of vaguely competent performance by Hillary will be hailed as a major victory, as if a coma patient in an ER suddenly sat up and spoke a few complete sentences.

The MSM are well aware of her fragile health (“fragile” is an understatement), but they’re trying to sit on the information, despite huge pressure from independent reporters all over the Web. At this point, the MSM is like a starving dog that will seize on any bone in its vicinity and make it into a full-course banquet: “She walked, she talked, she was coherent. Therefore, she’s a genius.”

“Despite her recent bout with pneumonia, she appeared strong and in charge.”

If Hillary can’t finish the debate, if she has to leave the stage or collapses, the MSM will try to blame it on Trump.

Who will be in the house Monday night? Will we see a stacked deck? Will people shower Trump with boos? If things get very rough for Hillary, will a protest break out against Trump to give her cover?

Anything is possible, including lights in the hall going out; spotty audio; cutting the televised feed, due to “technical problems” or even “a mysterious hacker.” The MSM are quite aware that Trump has no respect for them. They’re terrified that, if Trump is scoring heavily at the debate, their status as dispensers of truth for the masses will take another major torpedo. They know the public’s regard for them is already plummeting.

power outside the matrix

I have reason to believe media honchos have been in touch with the Trump campaign, on the issue of “credibility.” They’re telling Trump people the debates must be conducted in a dignified manner, in order to preserve the reputation of the office of the Presidency.

Obviously, this effort is aimed at toning Trump down, convincing him to behave. In other words, the media are trying to get him to abandon his most popular approach and turn him into another android candidate.

If he falls for that one, he’s done.

You can be sure, as well, that people inside Trump’s own campaign (infiltrators and typically standard fools) are urging him to back off, act Presidential, and consolidate his gains. They’re telling him his best hope is to build better trust with voters by “acting normal.”

“Too many people are still scared of you, Donald.”

If he falls for that one, he’s done.

They may as well be telling him, “Act more like Hillary.” Hillary has a patent on that act. He can’t match it.

On Monday night, the MSM will be looking for any possible Trump sliver they can use to claim, “The man revealed himself as dangerous.”

That’s their hole card. That’s what they want to sell: “People all over America are feeling fear and disgust. They’re reluctant to believe what Trump is saying—and they doubt his ability to perform competently as President.”

Post-debate, the liberal press will try to take that position, based on something Trump said or did.

Trump can view all these obstructions as a mine-field he must navigate carefully.

But if he does, he’s done.

This is a national debate. For many, many viewers, this will be their first lengthy exposure to the candidates. Hillary will keep (vaguely) emphasizing her experience and credibility as a political leader, versus Trump’s complete lack of real knowledge. She’ll try to act like a frontrunner, a fount of confidence. Trump has to crash that celebration and ruin it.

And the liberal media have to characterize his attacks as something on the order of childish tantrums.

“Trump offered little in the way of substance. He was mostly bluster, and people could see it. Hillary, on the other hand, displayed restraint befitting a veteran who, certainly, based on the record, knows foreign policy like the back of her hand…”

Hillary, on stage, will have a few zingers ready to go, if things start to turn against her, if Trump’s energy is overwhelming her. Something like, “Donald, I know you. I’ve known you for years. How you can even think about running for President? The whole world is watching. Millions of people know you and your campaign are a sham, a fake. Why don’t you make everybody happy, pick up your marbles, and go home. Go back to your Tower and forget about it!”

Applause will break out in the hall, and the liberal press will hope and pray it spells the end of the Trump fantasy.

They’ve been trying to put this guy away ever since he announced his candidacy, and everything they’ve done has not only failed, it’s backfired.

Hillary should be their ultimate backup. She should be the one to seal his fate. After all, she’s supposed to be the next President, isn’t she?

Does she have what it takes to be a closer? Or is she so burned out and ill she can barely make it to the show?

According to reports, Gennifer Flowers, one of Bill’s former girlfriends, has accepted Trump’s invitation to sit in the front row at the debate. If so, it appears Trump is doubling down, and remains in full attack mode.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.