Yes on 37 says Rappoport is “disrupting the healing”


by Jon Rappoport

November 13, 2012

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

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

Healing? You’re kidding, right?

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

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

Much more importantly, this YES ON 37 leader writes:

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

Really? What is the system?

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

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

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

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

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

Prop 37 has not yet been defeated.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How about the stages of challenging the forces of evil?

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

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

Disruptive is exactly what we need to be.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jon Rappoport

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

13 comments on “Yes on 37 says Rappoport is “disrupting the healing”

  1. Anonymous says:

    If the baton is indeed passing to you, please take it and run with it. Without trying to mix metaphors too much, it is one thing to lose a fight, fair or unfair, and another not to fight at all.

    I will acknowledge that, in all things, my stance is to favor more disclosure, more education, hmmm, more labelling — ultimately more freedom to make my own, well-informed choices. How, on one hand, can it be a requirement for us to know that our toilet paper is made from recycled material and, on the other hand, we cannot know what we eat? Something is rotten in the state of California.

  2. arianna says:

    Thank-you for saying what I was thinking! The question is why
    did Yes on 37 wimp out, are they really that naive? Or have they been paid off, or more interestingly perhaps is it just possible that one or more people working in the hierarchy of Yes on 37 got a nice income off of the donated dollars and is hoping to do so again? I am counting nothing out these days. The days of Don Corleon are upon us or perhaps they never left and I just never knew it till recently, when I became wide awake and aware of what’s really going on.
    It is to be noted that we have been watching the vote count online and I have several friends who are tracking their mail-in votes and I have been told that they cannot believe that they have not been counted as of today’s date. Lastly and perhaps most importantly keep up the good work.

  3. Ian MacLeod says:

    Y’know, I had almost that same conversation with my younger brother. I’m 57, he’s 54. You’d think he’d have learned in more than half a century that where lots of money is concerned, the Powers That Be can’t be trusted! As far as he’s concerned I’ve gone entirely around the bend and up the road ‘way too far on this “conspiracy theory” stuff. Pointing out the old saw that runs, “Just because I’m paranoid…” is useless. I’m in Oregon, and I when I came home from dropping off my ballot, “Obama Wins!” was all over the Net and, I’m told, the MSM. Now, I KNOW my vote wasn’t counted. In fact, I know my vote hasn’t been counted in over a decade. Most likely neither has yours.

    Experts? The medical “experts” say that vaccines work and don’t hurt people. Experts say that chemotherapy saves lives, and that mercury amalgam fillings are perfectly safe. Experts say that Obama is honest. They say this isn’t becoming a full-on police state.

    The experts can kiss my aging ass! Keep pushing, Jon!

    I can’t help wondering though if people who accept the “experts” pronouncements instantly like that and then start pushing everyone else to accept them too and “move on” can’t be nailed on a lesser charge. Maybe if I translated “brown-nosing the loudest voices” into Latin I could sneak it by. Ya think? Maybe not; but it SHOULD BE a legitimate charge…


  4. growmap17 says:

    Have you investigated thoroughly who is behind yes on 37?

  5. Anonymous says:

    oh man, it is like bunny rabbits against sharks. (in the water) The Y-on 37 campaign was good but it was way to soft. The whole campaign reminded me of the feeling I had watching Obama in the first debate with Romney, he just sat there and took it. And then to yield so easily and want to “start the healing” ? WTF

  6. Ivy says:

    you must be doing something pretty darn right. Just read where other states are jumping in for 2013 to label and rid our food chain of GMO’s. I appreciate and am in great gratitude that you are able to make a difference against such apathy if that is the right word. Thank YOU !

  7. Jay says:

    Are the yes-on-37 people being threatened? If you do get a debate Jon, please ask this question. Sounds like these people are getting hush money.

  8. babylovet says:

    Jon, I think you have it right.

    My experience with these types of “activists” is that their base loyalty is to “the system” and their ecological niche within it.

    To question its integrity could make them personae non grata and disable their future ability to re-submit this to another vote in a future electoral cycle.

    They don’t seem to — or want to — get that the same fraud will be perpetrated by the food conglomerates ad infinitum to protect their economic hegemony over the corporate food delivery system.

    The “healing disruption” rhetoric is a poor attempt at black comedy.

  9. Herban says:

    I am a California resident and I too felt that the “Yes’ers on 37” did roll over too easily. They were out in droves pounding the pavement and yelling at the top of their lungs and the VERY NEXT DAY after the election the only sound you heard was the whimper of defeat. They’ve done all of the research on GMO’s and Monsanto but didn’t think twice to use some of the donations to have some lawyers on retainer to look over the voting process? They regarded Monsanto as the Devil on Earth but did not assume that they might be evil enough to illegally sway the vote? Either the yes’ers are highly ignorant or they have a vested interested on maintaining this campaign for another year. Either way it smells way to fishy to me.

  10. Mary says:

    Please keep the news coming. I followed the issue only because I heard you on the radio and began following your updates. Never heard of GMOs before and am very embarrassed now that I left my bubble. I do not live in CA but all the people I talked to at work understood the importance of this vote. How could it have failed? How can CA determine the results without a real count? And how could the vote no’ers not be held accountable for their lies/illegal activity? Keep the information coming – we cannot make a difference and enlighten – without people like you! Stay Strong.

  11. Blair says:

    If the Yes on 37 campaign asked for a recount, which would cost them money(not sure how much), how could we be sure that the recount would be accurate? Would it, could it be done securely, if it couldn’t be done securely in the first place?

  12. Jon says:

    Jon On July 10, HHS Secretary Sebelius effectively turned the Combating Autism Act into the “Accepting Autism Act.” In her speech to the the Autism community, she made no mention of prevention, recovery, cure, or in any way ending autism. Note autism is now a pandemic based on CDC data and the SCPI study of contaminated vaccines and introduction of Bt corn and Bt soy pesticides poisoning 93% of pregnant women and their unborn babies. The Autism rate for boys is one in 54 in US trending upward. Monsanto attorney Michael Taylor, acting FDA Cheif under President Bill Clinton approved GMO corn in 1995 with Bt pesticides embedded in corn genes with NO SAFTEY TESTING. Canadian study by Sherbrooke University hospital in Quebec detected Bt pesticides in 93% of pregnant women and unborn babies in 2011. Genetically engineered (GE) corn varieties by State and United States-Bt Corn acreage doubled in 2005 and increased >20% in 2009. If these account in part for the dramatic autism rate increase to 113.6 AD per 10000 from 18 per 10000, then the decision to force Bt corn on the American consumer with NO SAFTEY TESTS is criminal.


    Furthermore, President and Founder of the SCPI, Theresa A. Diesher PhD, testified before the MN. Legislature on May 11, 2012. Dr. Diesher presented scientific evidence that Vaccines manufactured with aborted human fetal cells, which contain fragmented DNA and contaminated retroviruses, do trigger autism. We now have irrefutable evidence from a reliable source as to what causes autism. Thimerisol is also scientifically proven to cause Autism. Don’t be fooled. fact is most all vaccines contain aborted human fetal cells & harmful retroviruses.

    Resulting from Dr. Dieshers testimony the United States dept. of Health and Human Services IACC (Interagecy Autism Coordinating Committee) stratigic plan is calling for further investigation of the link between vaccines and autism. They are also calling for further investigation of biological agents contaminating the vaccines that we inject into our children!

    Dr. Diesher received her doctorate from Stanford University in Molecular and Cellular physiology in 1990, and post doctoral at the University of Washington. She is also the inventor of 22 issued US patents. Dr.’s David and father Mark Geier are considered the worlds foremost authorities on autism and it’s relationship to Thimerisol. They have scientifically proven vaccines containing this preservative cause Autism. So now you know. A Savior was once quoted as saying, “If you abide in My word, you shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.”

    Nice work Jon!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.