Sprott Money Contact Form

Thank you for contacting Sprott Money.  We will respond to you within 1 business day.



The Sprott Money Team

Sprott Money Ltd.
111 Queen St. East
Suite 501
Toronto, Ontario M5C 1S2

[t] 1.888.861.0775
[f] 416.861.9855

Administrative office only - no walk-in sales.


Please Try Again After Some Time...
Please enter valid captcha
Loading Image
Click here for an Important Message for Customers

Important Message For Customers:

The Ontario Government has legislated that all non-essential businesses MUST BE closed BY 12:01 am on March 25. The health and safety of our employees, clients and our community is our top priority. To do our part in slowing the spread of COVID-19, our staff are working remotely until further notice.

Furthermore, our carrier, UPS, has notified us that all shipments will not be insured and will not require a client’s signature upon delivery until further notice. Given the nature of our business, we are not willing to take that risk with your investments. As a result, we are temporarily suspending all shipments within Canada until UPS lifts these protocols.

Use e-mail for more expedient service.

Please be assured that your orders will be shipped to you as soon as we can. These are valuable investments you are making, and we want to make sure we send them in a safe, secured and insured manner. Should you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us at 1-888-861-0775 or email us at sales@sprottmoney.com

Thanks for your patience and understanding in this difficult time.

Swipe to the left

The Brexit Vote Will Be Rigged - Jeff Nielson

The Brexit Vote Will Be Rigged - Jeff Nielson
By Jeff Nielson 4 years ago 437347 Views 30 comments

June 16, 2016

How important is the upcoming “Brexit” vote in the UK? In a recent commentary , it was noted that the current leader in French polling to become France’s next president is Marine Le Pen, of Front-National. Ms. Le Pen has already dubbed herself “Madame Frexit”, going back to the time of the “crisis” in Greece.

Given that the UK has never been fully “in” the European Union, a British vote to leave the EU would not, by itself, be a fatal blow for this fascist entity. But the effect of a Brexit vote on France would be twofold. First, it would undoubtedly provide a further boost in popularity for Ms. Le Pen. Secondly, it would strengthen the resolve toward Frexit among the large majority in France who already have an unfavorable opinion of the EU.

The numbers above, cited in an article by Mike Shedlock, paint a clear picture. In only one of the European Union’s founding members (Italy) do we see anything resembling a “strong majority” when it comes to supporting EU membership. Apart from two EU newcomers – Poland and Hungary – we see European populations which are either evenly split in terms of support for the European Union, or (like Greece) are strongly opposed to this political union.

A successful Frexit would undoubtedly trigger a wave of nationalism across Europe, and lead to further, fatal defections in this made-for-the-bankers political hierarchy. Thus in the eyes of the Big Bank crime syndicate, Frexit must be prevented, at any/all costs. Since a successful Brexit would greatly increase the odds of Frexit, it too must be prevented, at any/all costs.

This brings us to the title for this commentary. Alleging the “rigging” of any election is still considered to be a very serious charge in the minds of most Western inhabitants, because the majority of these inhabitants still cling to the myth that we have a political system which provides some bastardized version of “democracy”. What evidence is there to support allegations that the One Bank’s oligarch proprietors are already rigging Western elections? The best kind: statistical evidence.

This evidence comes in the form of election polling. Here readers need to understand that political polling is a science. There is a very specific set of parameters which are used in gathering the data. The results released by the polling agencies are precise, statistical representations of that data.

Because the “data” involves only a sample of the electorate, there is a margin of error in such polling. That margin of error is also the result of precise, statistical calculations. Because the data involves the voting inclinations of human beings, this produces a second margin of error, known as “the confidence interval.” This is the possibility of an anomalous result, meaning something outside of the margin of error attributable to the mere size of the sample.

This confidence interval is also the product of a precise, statistical calculation. Typically, statisticians calculate a “95% confidence interval” as the level of certainty they seek to achieve in their polling. In other words, 95% of the time (19 times out of 20) the actual election result would fall within the specified margin of error, if voting occurred at that moment.

In aggregate terms, this means that polling agencies are able to “call” elections (within their margin of error) 95% of the time. Decades of practice in such polling has only improved upon the accuracy of this science. In the media, what we saw was a steady trend to announce election “victories” earlier and earlier on ballot night, based in large part upon the consistent degree of accuracy of pre-election polling, and the tendency for those poll results to be reflected in the early hours of tabulating voting.

Then, a few years ago, suddenly everything changed. Popping up in different spots, across the Western world, we began to see an increase in what were more than mere, anomalous results (i.e. elections which “defied the polls”). We suddenly began to see significant numbers of outrageous anomalies. Here we are not talking about election results which were merely slightly outside the margin-of-error boundaries of the polling, but rather results which were virtually opposite to these scientific polls.

For those seeking specific examples, let’s start with the domicile of this writer: the Province of British Columbia. In the last provincial election here (May 2013), the election result was supposed to be a foregone conclusion: a victory for the New Democratic Party.

[Liberal victor, Christy] Clark started the campaign as the clear underdog in the poll, trailing by 20 points.

However, the final result was something much different:

Not only did Clark defy countless polls predicting her defeat , she increased her party’s majority in the legislature by five seats and became the first woman to be elected premier in a general election in B.C . [emphasis mine]

Countless polls predicting her defeat . Admittedly, the NDP lead in the polls shrank from the original, enormous 20-point margin. However, that was to be expected, as even among a polarized electorate we rarely ever see such an extreme margin of victory in the final result. What is of significance in this rigged election is that throughout the political campaign, “countless polls” from several, different polling agencies mathematically predicted Clark’s defeat. Not a single poll result, at any time in the election indicated even the possibility of a Liberal majority victory.

This was not merely an anomalous result, outside of the confidence interval of the polling. It is was an outrageous anomaly – i.e. an impossible anomaly. It was a rigged election. For Canadian readers unimpressed with this single example, how about our last federal election (October 2015)?

As the campaign began, political polls showed the election as “a three-horse race” , too close to call. Toward the end of the election, support for the NDP faded somewhat, leading to polling agencies calling it a two-horse race , but still too-close-to-call.

The NDP, historically Canada’s most socially progressive party, had looked federally electable for the first time ever, buoyed by the Alberta win and a shift away from the far-left policies that had previously alienated voters.

But it has failed to distinguish itself from fellow center-left party the Liberals as the best alternative to the nine-year government of Conservative Prime Minster Stephen Harper.

As all Canadians know, the actual result was a Liberal landslide majority. Once again, we are not dealing with a mere “anomaly” outside the confidence interval. We are dealing with another outrageous anomaly, an election result which according to all the polls, from all the polling agencies, over the entire duration of the campaign, was not even possible.

Are we to believe that (at least in Canada) polling agencies have suddenly abandoned their scientific methodology, or become too inept to follow that methodology? Or, has the Canadian voter (for no reason) turned into a politically capricious beast, whose electoral whims have suddenly become completely unpredictable?

We don’t have to even bother asking the mainstream media for its opinion. We see these sorts of suspicious anomalies across all facets of our lives. Whenever something makes absolutely no sense, and/or cannot be explained, we’re always told the same thing: it’s “the New Normal” – meaning there is no (legitimate) explanation.

There is no explanation for these Canadian political anomalies, in back-to-back election results (for all residents of this province). But this is far from being just a made-in-Canada form of Western corruption. For those readers who doubt that the Brexit vote can/will be rigged, just look at the UK’s last national election (May 2015). In that election, we saw a virtual carbon-copy of what occurred in Canada’s most-recent national election.

After months of election projections showing the main parties deadlocked in a neck-and-neck finish, the final poll said something utterly different: British voters [supposedly] want Conservative rule . [emphasis mine]

“Utterly different” than all of the campaign polling. Not just outside the margin of error. Not remotely close to the margin of error, of any of the polling, at any time in the campaign. The subtitle of the article containing the excerpt above summarizes yet another rigged election in the realm of Western politics:

Britain’s Conservatives win big, beating no one more than the pollsters and election experts.

In the real world, politicians can’t “beat” pollsters, because political polling agencies do not compete against politicians. They are impartial observers (at least, the respected ones). They get paid just as much for their work no matter who they announce as leading a political race, or how large or small the margin. There is no rational explanation for the sudden appearance of all these extreme political anomalies, where (in every case) an Establishment candidate has emerged victorious – and with a “majority” mandate.

Of course if the oligarchs continue rigging elections to such an extreme degree as to obviously “defy the polls”, reasonable people will begin to get suspicious. Thus, as Brexit nears, we see the oligarchs attempting a new tactic: falsifying political polls. Last week ; three, separate UK polls were released on the Brexit campaign. All three polls showed a statistically significant majority in favor of “leaving” (the European Union). Just one day later; the Corporate media came out with this headline.

Fresh polls show Brexit vote swinging back to ‘remain’

Imagine that! Just 24 hours after several independent polls showed a significant majority in favor of Brexit, we’re told that there are two “new polls” which show British voters flip-flopping in their support. Or are there?

A Daily Telegraph/ORB poll published late Monday put support for retaining EU membership at 48%, versus 47% for those wanting a Brexit, among those who intend to vote.

Meanwhile, a Times/YouGov poll out Monday found 43% of respondents planning to vote to stay, while 42% support a departure, and 11% are “don’t know.”

The first observation of note here is that neither of these political polls are statistically significant, in contrast to the three polls (showing the opposite result) the preceding day. For those readers unfamiliar with statistical terminology, a brief explanation is warranted.

As previously noted, all polling (of any kind) has a margin of error attached to it, typically somewhere around 3%. Thus any poll result which reports a difference which is less than the margin of error is not “statistically significant”. Instead, it is mere statistical noise, where the polling provides no clear indication of a leader.

The three polls released on June 6th all indicated majority support for Brexit, and all were statistically significant. With the two polls released on June 7 th, which supposedly showed support to “remain”, both were just razor-thin 1% margins, and thus neither result was statistically significant. Yet the Corporate media reported the “noise” on equal terms with the actual statistically decisive polls from the previous day. Note also that both of the polls which showed supposed support to remain in the EU were manufactured by known mouthpieces of the Establishment: the Daily Telegraph and the London Times.

Then there is the math. If only one poll had been released on June 6 th showing significant support for Brexit, the possibility of two polls coming out the next day where both (supposedly) indicated even an indecisive outcome would have been less than 25%. However, given that three polls from June 6 th all showed significant support for Brexit, the possibility of two polls coming out the next day supposedly showing an indecisive outcome is somewhere well below 10% .

In other words, the two polls from June 7th were extreme anomalies – poll results which were so improbable as to raise immediate suspicion in the minds of those with statistical inclinations. We know the oligarchs have rigged elections. We know they intend to rig the Brexit vote (just like they rigged the UK’s last, national election). Now they appear to be rigging the political polls, as well.

If our elections are now rigged, and the political polls involving these elections are now being rigged as well, then the phrase “Western democracy” has clearly descended to the level of an oxymoron.

Jeff Nielson is co-founder and managing partner of Bullion Bulls Canada; a website which provides precious metals commentary, economic analysis, and mining information to readers and investors. Jeff originally came to the precious metals sector as an investor around the middle of last decade, but with a background in economics and law, he soon decided this was where he wanted to make the focus of his career. His website is www.bullionbullscanada.com.

The views and opinions expressed in this material are those of the author as of the publication date, are subject to change and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sprott Money Ltd. Sprott Money does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness and reliability of the information or any results from its use.

John Lennon's Ghost 4 years ago at 4:59 PM
BACK IN THE EUSSR - (parody of The Beatles' "Back in the USSR")

Oh, flew in from Liberia Beach D.O.A.
Got to a hospital bed last night
All the way this ebola bug was in my pee
Man I was a dreadful sight

I'm back in the E.U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are... boy
Back in the EU, back in the EU,
Back in the E.U.S.S.R.

Those great debts really knock me out
They kick the West's behind
Angela's blubbery cellulite is hanging out
That EU troika is always on my, my, my mind

Take me to Carpathian Mountains way down South
Let me foreclose your daddy's farm
All the way the bankers' hands are reaching out
Come and grease your comrade's palm

I'm back in the E.U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are... boy
Back in the EU, back in the EU,
Back in the E.U.S.S.R.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 9:38 AM
Nice job, JLG!
Ronald 4 years ago at 11:49 AM
There is another possibility of manipulation that is not yet well known, namely the manipulation of search results by Google - see http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548 for an explanation. And if the mainstream "news" show several highly publicised "polls" with unfavorable results for Brexit this gives more ammunition to Google to skew the search results and influence voters.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 4:57 PM
Yes Ronald!

As a writer, who (like most) does most of his "research" by search engine, I can personally attest to the perversion of Google. It is almost IMPOSSIBLE to obtain any old data.

Even if you specify a date several years in the past as a primary criterion in your search, all that Google spits out is current results. I've looked for items from several years ago which I know exist (because I clearly remember the news item), and it often takes me SEVERAL different search phrases AND looking many pages into the results just to find something more than a year old.

This is a major component of the constant Revisionism in which the propaganda machine engages. It's pretty easy to get people to "forget" the recent past (and embrace the Revisionist propaganda) if they can't FIND any past coverage of those events.
Michael Barlow 4 years ago at 4:38 PM
100% agree and have been saying this or the past 2 days. I wouldn't put it past the "hidden" fixer to have had the MP killed. Far fetched YES!. Possible YES! Reasons Large enough. YES! Stakes High enough YES!. So what's the possibility. I'd say over 70%. Hence the result when it remains IN, will not be thought of as UNUSUAL! It stinks and the only problem with their thinking is 23 million of us are now annoyed and we are NOT going to allow the EU to send their wastrels.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 10:58 AM
Michael, I think the circumstances make it clear that the Labour MP was murdered by the oligarchs. The extreme/excessive media (and political response) to this event looks totally scripted. And then there is the timing.

The polls were showing "Leave" building its lead -- to the point where mere ballot-box tampering may not have been enough to alter the outcome. It reeks of desperation.
Stn 4 years ago at 1:29 PM
there is a story on veterans today busting Jo Cox murder
Calum 4 years ago at 7:39 PM
You're genuinely all utterly mad. Have you ever just taken your tinfoil hats off and taken a step back to actually look at what you're saying.

Not only have you massively misunderstood how opinion polling works (not to mention the 2015), the best part is you actually think the UK/EU govt is competent enough to rig and election and murder an MP. Obviously that wouldn't leak...
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 9:30 AM
Calum, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But for those who choose to be Skeptics, the onus is on YOU to explain how/why we are suddenly seeing "extreme anomalies" in elections all over the Western world -- when we never saw such "anomalies" before.

I just listed a FEW examples here. The most-recent election in my province. The most-recent election in my nation. And the most-recent election in the UK, the jurisdiction on which this article was based. If I looked further afield, I could have come up with NUMEROUS other examples.
powerunseen 4 years ago at 4:45 PM
Keep an eye on you tube. I saw cheating re Scottish Referendum.
Anthony Maw 4 years ago at 5:07 PM
Like the debate between an expanding and collapsing Universe, the EU will either come together under a single big political union, or will eventually fracture back into nation-states but the simple common currency "glue" cannot hold it together by itself. Britain's parliament speaker was interviewed on Canada Business News Network mentioned one of Britain's biggest problems is the continuous migration of people from Poland and Hungary into Britain, which those people have the *right* to do under British EU membership and under which Britain is having difficulty absorbing, never mind the Middle-Eastern refugees.
Pam Ryan 4 years ago at 6:20 PM
Paranoid much?
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 11:01 AM
Pam, I wrote a response to skepticism of this nature three years ago.

Len 4 years ago at 6:24 PM
I am not discounting the rigging warning, but what the polls cannot predict is the numbers of people who will say one thing, and then do something else at the ballot box.
Curiously, Exit Polls are much more successful at forecasting the outcome.
For example, during the run-up to last year's UK elections, the main polls had Conservatives and Labour neck and neck for months.
These polls proved grossly inaccurate.
However the Exit Polls showed the Conservatives would win by a huge majority, which is what happened.
So it would appear that after voting, voters were far more willing to tell pollsters the truth.
In the UK the Exit Polls indicated that people got the government they voted for.
The Exit Polls are relatively small and well-scrutinzed and cannot be ignored if rigging is to be seriously suggested.
Conducted independently, with scrutineers from each party, they can be the canaries in the ballot boxs.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 11:05 AM
Len, on the one hand, I agree that Exit Polls are NORMALLY most accurate because they have the closest temporal connection to the event. However, when (so-called) "exit polls" completely defy all pre-election polling, I would suggest we are looking at more rigged polls.

Even with the supposed Exit Polls supporting the actual vote, there was STILL an official public inquiry into this anomalous election result. Imagine how much louder the public outcry would have been if they had NOT faked the Exit Polls -- and those polls had also reflected pre-election polling.
ManInJapan 4 years ago at 8:33 PM
I work in Japan and have already made this prediction to all my Japanese friends and associates, asking them to take it as evidence of rigging when it all, unfortunately, comes true:


The U.K. will 'vote' to remain in the European Union by a narrow margin of 2-3%.

This result has presumably already been prearranged with Brussels and David Cameron's prewritten, post-result speech will, no doubt, run along the lines of "The British people have today demonstrated their desire to remain a vital part of the European Union. However, the uncertainty and closely-run nature of the result shows us just how much work still
remains to be done in restoring our citizen's confidence and belief in a truly mutually beneficial relationship with Europe.
Rest assured that I and the government will now work tirelessly towards this end and that we will strive to prove that you, as a nation, have chosen wisely."
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 11:00 AM
Yes ManInJapan, I think your cynicism captures the current scenario perfectly. Cameron may even decide to "borrow" your script. ;)
AshBeth 4 years ago at 2:57 PM
I think you've got his speech word for word there. Only I really HOPE it's an out vote.
Adrian Shiner 4 years ago at 2:13 PM
UK elections are NOT rigged but politicians lie. No one can change my vote from exit to remain in. I would never tell a pollster how I am going to vote. Most UK people have grown wise to the dictatorial nature of the EU.
Len 4 years ago at 3:06 PM
Adrian - I sympathize with your sentiment to never tell a pollster how you intend to vote. But what about an Exit vote, when you are asked afterwards how you voted? The (sample) Exit votes are hand-counted and scrutinized and seem to me to provide a safeguard of sorts. Otherwise, on what do you base your confidence that nothing can change your vote? Not even algorithm bias hidden in a counting machine?
Adrian Shiner 4 years ago at 4:50 PM
Our votes are writtem on paper and hand counted in public. Each polling station has sealed boxes of votes. We are quick to sort out corrupt election tactics.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 9:27 AM
"We are quick to sort out corrupt election tactics."

Really Adrian? In the United States, large corporations are allowed to spend/donate UNLIMITED quantities of money -- meaning the oligarchs who own these corporations can simply BUY the government of their choice.

After the last UK election; a public probe was launched. But the "probe" wasn't even looking at the possibility of vote-rigging. Rather, it was asking the question "how could all of the polling agencies been so wrong?"

Lol! With myopic "vigilance" of this nature, how can you state with any certainty that elections can't/aren't being rigged?
adrian 4 years ago at 10:28 AM
Jeff, your view is tainted by the crazy USA system of politics....... This referendum is not about local politics, it is about the democracy of this country versus being in a corrupt dictatorship.
AshBeth 4 years ago at 3:01 PM
How do you rig something as big as a general election or a referendum?

It would require a massive conspiracy surely. There are all the counting officials in all of the regions, who would surely say something if their result was announced as something different than they knew it to be. If they don't they have to be part of the conspiracy. It seems like a lot of people to be involved and nothing leak out.

I'm not saying I don't believe they CAN be rigged, just can't work out HOW.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 7:40 PM
AshBeth, you must be a newer reader. I REPORT on "massive conspiracies" on a regular basis. Not "theories" but rather CONVICTIONS.

The Big Banks were CONVICTED of manipulating all the world's currencies, going back to at least 2008. They've been CONVICTED of rigging almost every market in existence. How is rigging an election any different?

No. Depending on the METHOD of vote-rigging, it doesn't necessarily have to include a large number of active conspirators. However, it probably isn't possible to "rig" an election where the margin is too large. This may explain why the Establishment sees a need to "delay the vote."
Anthony Maw 4 years ago at 3:59 PM
Rigged by *WHOM*? Illuminati? Bilderbergers ?? Let the conspiracy theories begin....
Dylan Jones 4 years ago at 12:45 PM
A "super-entity" that controls 40% of the global economy, rigging equity and commodity markets on a daily basis, even the interest rate, would find it child's play to rig a one off event.

AL 4 years ago at 1:35 PM
The outcome of the Brexit vote was to leave the EU. This was the rigged outcome and to be expected. Discuss.
Jeff Nielson 4 years ago at 10:02 AM
Sure, Al.

Just look at what we've seen post-vote. Cameron announced he was resigning. BUT he's staying on for three months, and during this time he refuses to even BEGIN secession negotiations. Then we've already also been warned by the media and politicians that other EU nations will be looking to "punish" the UK in the negotiations.

Expect one of two outcomes from this. The EU will offer the UK "better terms" to remain in the EU (and the UK gov will force the people to vote AGAIN), or the UK government will throw up its hands and claim it's "impossible" to negotiate a separation.

This melodrama is a long, long ways from being over. It's just that the oligarchs have chosen a much longer road to attempt to frustrate the will of the People.
Paul Cardin 4 years ago at 4:12 PM
Well Jeff. Did the riggers succeed or fail?

Which side were they on? Here's an informative hashtag: #VotegateUK

Back to top