From: Jill Richardson <orangeclouds115@gmail.com>

Date: November 2, 2012 12:59:02 PM PDT

To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Subject: [sdfoodnotlawns] new prop 37 development - FBI looking into No on 37's lies

I just got off a media conference call with the Yes on 37 campaign. Apparently, the No on 37 campaign (industry-funded anti-GMO labeling campaign) has done so much lying that they actually might have committed a crime by illegally using the FDA's logo along with a false statement that they attributed to the FDA. Yes on 37 reported that to the govt, and the FBI is now following up to find out if, in fact, a crime was committed. A number of journalists from major publications like the New York Times and Bloomberg were on the call, and they were really pressing the Yes on 37 folks because they had called the US Attorney's office to find out whether an investigation had been opened up as the Yes on 37 people were claiming, and the US Attorney said that no, there was no investigation. So there was a lot of back and forth about semantics - basically that Yes on 37 submitted a criminal complaint and got a phone call back from the FBI, and is that what you call an investigation or not? They said that they would call it an investigation but perhaps the FBI has a different name for it, but it's all semantics. The point is, they said, that No on 37 has been lying and, they allege, committing a felony by using the FDA's logo. But the journalists on the call seemed so bothered by the discrepancy that Yes on 37 said there was an FBI "investigation" whereas the US Attorney's office said there wasn't, that I don't know what sort of coverage it's going to get. It sounded like it could have backfired on Yes on 37 for using such strong language when they weren't backed up by the FBI on it.

Jill