In 2008, John McCain Ignored Vote Fraud to Avoid Civil Unrest

Leaked emails from the intelligence group Stratfor recently revealed some shocking allegations of massive Democrat voter fraud in 2008. The emails revealed by WikiLeaks say that the McCain campaign decided to ignore the wide spread voter fraud in order to avoid massive civil unrest — even though it meant he’d lose the White House.

The emails say that Democrats were caught “stuffing ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio,” but the McCain campaign decided to let it all go.

After discussions with his inner circle, which explains the delay in his speech, McCain decided not to pursue the voter fraud in PA and Ohio, despite his staff’s desire to make it an issue. He said no. Staff felt they could get a federal injunction to stop the process. McCain felt the crowds assembled in support of Obama and such would be detrimental to our country and it would do our nation no good for this to drag out like last go around, coupled with the possibility of domestic violence.

J. Christian Adams, a former United States Department of Justice official, notes how fraught with danger these revelations are.

With the blessings of hindsight, we see that fear of mob violence in our country is no longer a hypothetical in the mind of a presidential candidate. The call by the New Black Panther Party in Sanford, Florida, to seize (or kill) a private citizen is no longer the stuff of a senator’s imagination.

Adams was the member of the Justice Dept. that revealed to the world that Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, decided not to prosecute the obvious law breaking perpetrated in Philadelphia by the Black Panthers during the 2008 general election.

Adams feels we are an inch away from major civil unrest as Democrats look to increase voter fraud in order to keep control in Washington and attempt to get away with it by using the threat of civil unrest to intimidate Republicans into turning a blind eye to it all… OR ELSE.

This is exactly the sort of law breaking we’ve come to expect from the Democrat Party. It will get worse before it gets better but that doesn’t mean we should ignore it.

Shortlink:

Posted by on April 26, 2012.
Filed under 2008 Presidential Race, Agitators, Barack Obama, Big government, corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, John McCain, Liberals, Voter Fraud.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com "The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

    McCain figured he could campaign as a ‘gentleman’ should – Marquis of Fantailler rules and everything….
    Up against a Chicago machine politician with unquestioning media support…

    And then didn’t want to call ‘foul!’ when they kicked the election system in the nuts?

    (Shakes head.)  You know, I really think Hillary might have been a better choice…. for the Republicans.

    (For those wondering about the Marquis of Fantailler – from the Discworld Wiki…

    A nobleman of Ankh-Morpork, or perhaps of Quirm, who got into a lot of fights – mostly because his name was the Marquis of Fantailler. Inventor of a list of rules on the manly art of pugilism, mostly concerning places you were not allowed to hit him. Following the Marquis of Fantailler’s rules is a widely recognized way of committing suicide.

    )http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Marquis_of_Fantailler

    • BluesHarper

      “You know, I really think Hillary might have been a better choice…. for the Republicans.”
      Just the other day I was thinking the same thing. It still might be? What would you reckon that would do?

  • jim_m

    You can’t appease threats of violence and expect that they will not continue.  All McCain did was assure that the threat was even worse this time around and that is exactly what it is.

    This kind of ignorance didn’t work for Chamberlain either.

  • Hank_M

    On the one hand, I applaud McCain for putting the Country first.

    And yet, if this had been brought to light, more than likely steps would have been taken to ensure the integrity of future elections. 

    • Conservachef

      Hank,

      I agree that it seems to be a gutsy move, putting the country above personal ambition. If the opposition had dealt honestly and acted fairly, I would say that what he did was a good thing.

      However, the opposition was stuffing ballot boxes and practicing voter intimidation in order to elect “hope and change” in order to “fundamentally change the country,” which kind of runs in the opposite direction of dealing honestly and acting fairly…

      And yet, if this had been brought to light, more than likely steps would
      have been taken to ensure the integrity of future elections.

      What, like the DOJ did with the Black Panthers?

    • LiberalNightmare

       If this is true, he did not put the country first.

      He took the easy way out.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_G7YIUZMXOD5JGZZTCYMVA75KFU Shadow

         Absolutely.  It takes courage to confront corruption and end to it.  McCain took the coward’s way out, hoping to appease the factions that may have stolen the election rather than face violence head on.  This is how liberals would have us believe we should resolve conflict.  It doesn’t work, eventually you must take a stand or face ruin.   The country has descended further into threats of violence and ruin because he didn’t do the right thing.

  • Meiji_man

    Three Individuals (That I know of) have found themselves in the position where they realized that with some effort, they could throw the system into an uproar and perhaps win the Presidency. 

    Richard Nixon allowed the Illinois vote to go unchallenged and lost to Kennedy. Putting the Country before his personal benefit. 
    McCain, perhaps still living in the 1960′s did the same. 
    The Third was Al Gore, who was presented with a way to disenfranchise American Voters and overseas Military Members threw everything but the kitchen sink into trying to steal the election in 2000. Fortunately the SCOTUS stopped him. 

    It is now firmly in the Democrat playbook. Elections don’t stop until the courts say they are stopped. And the Republican’s better figure that out. But remember if it’s not close they can’t steal it. 

    • jim_m

       It is now firmly in the Democrat playbook. Elections don’t stop until the courts say they are stopped.

      “Nothing is over until we win!” – Russ Feingold (D- Wisconsin)

      They will not accept defeat at the ballot box.  They will cheat and do whatever they can to steal the election.  Failing that they will riot in the streets and foment unrest to overturn the election and take by force what they cannot get legally.

    • Brucehenry

      You know, I’ve heard that stuff about the Chicago ballot-stuffing throwing the 1960 election to Kennedy all my life. I wonder if there’s any truth to it. For one thing, noble gestures that resulted in a loss of his power weren’t characteristic of Nixon — until his resignation!

       And it may be that this story is one of those things that “everybody knows.” But is it true? Sincere question. If you say it is, how do you know?As for McCain putting “Country First” in this case, I suggest you may be accepting these allegations as fact — they are completely unsubstantiated as far as I know.

      I suggest your version of the history of the 2000 election is somewhat slanted. I believe each man sincerely believed he himself had won. What’s done is done. I wish we hadn’t had to endure 8 years of Bush, but we did. Of course, Obama might not be president today if Bush hadn’t been.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        And he might not if Gore had gotten it, either.

        I’m thinking that Gore was about >this<  close to going off the deep end in that election – and what happened on 9/11 would have been met with a response that would show he was 'serious' – and things would have gotten even more interesting than they were.

        But that's as may be.  He didn't get it, he didn't take office, and he proceeded to go whole hog on the "Buy my carbon credits or the Earth gets it…" scheme.

      • EricSteel

        But Gore never lead in the Florida vote count, and for all of his public proclamations of counting every vote, in reality he only meant count the votes in counties with majorities of Democrats.

        November 9: Gore’s team, led by former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, requests a hand recount of ballots in four Florida counties — Palm Beach, Dade, Broward and Volusia — and a circuit judge orders Palm Beach County not to certify its results.

    • LiberalNightmare

       The one thing about a democrat that you can always count on.

      They will always stoop low enough

  • Commander_Chico

    Um, history will record that Gore was ripped off, just on the fact of the selective purge of the Florida voter rolls by Katherine Harris.

    Both sides play the game of election fraud – one reason why the stability of the United States is in doubt. 

    Fortunately, Chico is ready for the civil war – he’ll get his ass out of Dodge.

    • Sky__Captain

       You would be incorrect in your assertions of Al “The Cheater” Gore. History shows GWB won Florida by in all “recounts” conducted in Florida.

      Libtard electoral cheating is why the stability of the US is in doubt,until the libtard cheating and general unlawfulness goes too far.
      At that point, the libtards will realize that conservatives tend to have more firearms in their personal possession and know how to use them…

      As for Comrade_Chico leaving – don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.

      • GarandFan

         Amazing how many Kool Aid drinkers still think Bush “stole” the election.  Makes you wonder where the hell they were all those months of chad counting.  

        • jim_m

           They might find the rest of the public a little more sympathetic had they not spent their time trying to game the system by choosing only the counties/districts that would give them an advantage rather than doing a clean and straight forward recount.

          The problem with the left is that they keep trying to rig it so they will win rather than simply trying to find out what the correct result is.  But then they don’t believe in democracy.  Voting is merely a facade to give their authoritarian government a fig leaf of legitimacy.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Still pisses me off they had batches of lawyers come down and disqualify the military absentee ballots…

            Can’t have those count, can we?

          • Commander_Chico

            “Voting is merely a facade to give their authoritarian government a fig leaf of legitimacy,” yes, but “they” are the permanent oligarchy.

            The same cast of bankers, merchants of death, oilmen, big agro, poverty pimps, and “national security” think-tanker war whores who always run things.

        • iwogisdead

          Even Breyer and Souter found that the recount process was unconstitutional (7-2 decision on this issue). Ginsburg thought it was OK, but she hates our Constitution.

          But Gore never really wanted a recount. What he wanted to do was to so fuck up the recount process that it couldn’t possibly be upheld, to delay the reporting of Florida’s electors beyond the deadline, and to disenfranchise the entire state of Florida, which would have put him in the White House. That’s why his campaign argued to and convinced the Florida SC to impose an extremely short deadline for the recount in the first instance, leading to only a “partial recount” from Miami-Dade. That partial recount was one of many reasons why seven SCOTUS justices found the recount to be unconstitutional.

          The SCOTUS thought that disenfranchising an entire state wasn’t a very good thing.

          • retired.military

            Bush won every recount that Florida had.

          • Meiji_man

            In the end, Al Gore put his own ambition before the needs of the Country. God smiled on us that day. 

          • Commander_Chico

            It was not an issue of the vote count – it was the people wrongfully purged from the rolls as felons, with a bias towards African-American names.  If there was one Tyrone Jackson who was a felon, they’d purge and turn all Tyrone Jacksons away from the polls in 2000.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File

      • Commander_Chico

        I’ll continue commenting from the Algarve or Dalmatia, so you can keep me informed about riots, checkpoints, “emergency” censorship, internments and gun battles.

    • Gmacr1

      Beats living in a target rich enviorment…

    • MunDane68

       BY all recounts that followed the established rules, i.e. looking at ALL the disputed ballots, not just the ones from Dem leaning precincts, Gore lost Florida.  Only when he was allowed to apply the rules he wanted (just counting the disputed ballots from Miami/Dade County and Broward) did it favor him.

    • Evil Otto

      It will, eh? How come no recount in Florida showed Gore leading at any time? Several news organizations conducted independent counts… and found that Bush won.

  • Gmacr1

    Ignoring or turning a blind eye to voter fraud not only condones it but facilitates it happening again. Conservatives are tired of it and have started passing laws to see that it is stopped, Marxists scream that its discrimination when confronted with the new voter ID laws when they know that without them they can continue to cheat.

    Until the laws on presenting valid ID for voter registration, absentee ballots and same day registration are changed to prove eligibility fraud will continue. Not to forget forcing the purging of voter rolls prevent the dead and dual residency voters from voting.

  • The_Queen_of_France

    Anyone who doesn’t think there will be riots when Dear Leader loses the election is either willfully ignorant or blind to what’s going on in this administration and its minions.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      I think that is possible but improbable on anything like a national scale.

      • The_Queen_of_France

         I’m not so sure.  Remember the riots in the mid-60s?  That was pretty widespread, and now there’s all sorts of social media (Facebook, twitter, etc) to fan the flames faster.  Look at the rapid increase recently in flashmobs.  Then there’s the new black panthers, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc.  They’re already inciting violence regarding Zimmerman and nothing is being done about it at all.  These groups either are fairly certain or have been given definite information that they won’t be interfered with.

      • jim_m

         No.  It will be confined to the cities that the dems control.  It’s their constituencies that will be upset and they will be the ones that riot.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          Bingo.

          And they’ll meet with a series of mischeifs and unfortunate incidents should they head for the suburbs.

        • The_Queen_of_France

           Unfortunately, I work in the heart of one of those cities.  On the other hand, most of the people I work with are armed to the teeth.

    • Commander_Chico

      Who TF is going to get off the couch when Obama loses?  C’mon . . . .

      • Jwb10001

        your friends in the OWS folks that’s who.

  • Brucehenry

    Another edition of the Huston Report: News That Someone Alleges Happened!

    Shocking allegations indeed. But allegations are all they are. Where’s the evidence that this alleged ballot-box-stuffing actually, you know, occurred?

    And I had to chuckle at the email writer’s worries about “domestic violence.” Reckon he knows the common meaning of that phrase?

    • herddog505

      Oh, I don’t know.  Perhaps the evidence is filed in the same place as the evidence that the Sanford PD ignored / covered up the Martin “murder”.

      /sarc

      Snark aside, you’ve got a point.  There are LOTS of rumors that fly around (apparently, some lefties have been floating one that the Koch brothers are paying George Zimmerman’s legal fees!), and many of them have no more basis in reality than claims of Barry’s genius.

      Further, for just about as long as I can remember, there have been lurid rumors / predictions of dirty tricks, violence, and even coups around election time.  Happily, none have ever panned out.  Quite aside from the fact that I can’t see the military going along with such a thing, I think that the VAST majority of Americans have a good sense of fair play and, while they might not be happy that their side lost, they aren’t about to start shooting folks over it.

      • Brucehenry

        Red meat. People all riled up, discussing how those “black Democrats” might just get all violent. That’s the point of articles like this, trumpeting accusations as if they were proven.Or even substantiated at all.

        • herddog505

          OFFS!  Can you NOT play the race card for once in your life???  Jebus, when dems spin lurid tales of the GOP conspiring with Diebold to rig and election, is that RAAAAAACISM, too?  Can you not see that this is less about the color of the (alleged) criminals’ skins and more about “the other side are a pack of dirty cheaters”???

          • Brucehenry

            It was the article’s author, not I, who mentioned “black Democrats” allegedly stuffing ballot boxes. And it is the tenor of this thread that those from “the cities that dems control” better be careful lest they meet with some “mischiefs and unfortunate incidents should they head for the suburbs.”

            Now, who might those from these Dem cities be, one might ask? You know, people from Detroit, Newark, etc.? And what is the implication of the manly suburban he-man who promises to cause these unfortunate incidents?

            I stand by my comment. Red meat for wannabe tough guys.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Your statement:

            It was the article’s author, not I, who mentioned “black Democrats” …

            Is factually incorrect.

            The ONLY places the phrase “black Democtrats” appears is in your comments above, and my quotation of your comments.

            You owe Mr. Huston an apology.

          • warnertoddhuston

            Uh, I said Democrats. I did not localize any fraud to any race anywhere in the piece (and the Black Panther guys were doing voter intimidation, not voter fraud) Not only that, but I am REPORTING on the story. I did not originate it or add my opinion to the particulars other than to say this sort of lawbreaking is expected from Democrats… again, no race mentioned there. Why do you left-wingers have to be such liars?

          • Brucehenry

            Sorry, I didn’t mean YOU when I said “the article’s author.” I meant the email’s author in the links. I’m sorry that I wasn’t clear. 

            This Burton guy said “1) the black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio.” This is early in your link to “LEAKED STRATFOR EMAILS: Democrats Manipulated The 2008 Election Results.”

            Again, Huston, sorry for the misstatement. Again, I meant the email’s author, referenced in your links, not you personally.

            However, the story is still all allegation, no substantiation, whatever its provenance. So, it’s still, in my estimation, red meat for wannabe tough guys. They’re all riled up now, just itchin’ for one of those rioters from “cities that Dems control” to meet with some misfortune if they come a-riotin’ hereabouts in the suburbs. Whar’s muh shootin’ arn, Maw?

            EDIT: Also, this J Christian Adams character quotes Burton in HIS article saying that “black Dems” stuffed ballot boxes.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          No one but you has used the phrase “black Democrats” in the article above or in the comments on Mr. Huston’s article.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/ Shawn

            Bruce apologized for falsely attributing the quote to Mr. Huston.

            The quote was from the linked article.

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, to see one of our trolls play the race card!  /Louis Renault Mode

        • TomInCali

          I’m not surprised you’re shocked, because it didn’t happen. If you actually bothered to read the article/emails in question, you’d see that he was quoting the Stratfor operative who referred to “black Dems”.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Why look!  An apologist for race card playing leftists.

            He looks so dashing in his sheet and hood.

          • TomInCali

            Huh? Do you think that making a nonsensical statement somehow negates the fact that you were wrong?

          • Brucehenry

            No, no, He Who May Not Be Engaged is technically right. No one used the phrase “black Democrats.” It was only “black Dems.”

            Because I said “ocrat” I’m a racist. Or something. LOL.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

    Sniff, sniff…

    You need to take out the trash, Mr. Huston.

  • Guest

    I especially enjoyed the email indicating Karl Rove and his ‘boys’ intended to rig the 2012 GOP nomination process to install the candidate of their choice.

    Looks like he succeed. The GOP nominee is going to be the guy NOBODY wanted.

    Well, nobody except Karl Rove.

    Seems that Rove was so pissed about McCain getting the 08 nomination that he — now ge this — wanted somebody “we could control”.

    Thanks again. Watch for this to hit the fan 1 week before the election. I never would have found it were it not for Wizbang.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      The Crazy with this one is STRONG.

      • TomInCali

         No, only his reading comprehension is strong. Unlike yours, apparently.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          Ah, the young fool crazy bookend for the old fool crazy bookend…

          • TomInCali

            And yet again, a random nonsensical statement that avoids the factual point that was made. An interesting approach, at a minimum.

      • Hank_M

        LOL.

    • jim_m

       The GOP nominee is going to be the guy NOBODY wanted

      Yep.  Nobody… Except of course all those voters who voted for him so he could win all those primaries.  You can’t make this stuff up.  Grumpy thinks that NOBODY wanted Romney.  Granted, he isn’t my favorite and on this conservative blog you won’t find many conservatives who are giving him unqualified support, but it seems to me rather obvious that several million voters have voted for him by now in the primaries. 

      Actually winning votes tends to make it look like more people than just Karl Rove wanted Romney.  Unless Rove cast all those votes himself.  I’ll bet his hand is getting cramped from punching all those chads.

      Grumpy must be hitting the bottle tonight because his comments have really slidden into tin foil hat territory.

      • TomInCali

        Do you acknowledge that there’s a difference between “wanting” someone and “settling” for someone? Next thing you’ll be telling us is that the entire conservative base “wanted” McCain to be the nominee.

        • Sky__Captain

           Yeah, and you’ll be telling us that ALL Democrats want the genius of “57 states” fame.

          • TomInCali

            No, I’m not the one making the generalizations. Did you not know that, or you just didn’t care?

        • jim_m

           I think it is obvious that SOMEBODY actually wanted Romney to win the nomination.  The allegation is that NOBODY did.  This is clearly false.  In a primary you get more selection than you do a general election.  People do settle in the general election, but in the primary you usually get a candidate that works for you. 

          No candidate ever matches your exact desires for a nominee.  That is unless it is the obamessiah, who is all things to all people and who is healing the earth and lowering the seas.

          SO I guess the GOP needs to settle since the dems already have god incarnate on their ballot.

        • http://www.tempeteaparty.org Lee Reynolds

          “Settling” says that there was no better candidate to vote for, which is true in this case.  We have to choose among the candidates who actually show up and run for office.  Given the choice between Romney and an unnamed Perfect Candidate, virtually everyone would choose the latter.  Unfortunately that candidate stayed home so we have to make do with the least-bad of those candidates who did show up.

      • TomInCali

        Do you acknowledge that there’s a difference between “wanting” someone and “settling” for someone? Next thing you’ll be telling us is that the entire conservative base “wanted” McCain to be the nominee.

  • 914

    In 2012 Obama embraces voter fraud to incite discourse among the populace..

    Yep! That sounds bout right..

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.zielbauer Jim Zielbauer

    Remember McCain’s acceptance speech, “Fight With Me!! Fight With Me!!”…only he didn’t want to fight…

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Hooson/100002939023994 Paul Hooson

    I don’t really see any evidence that claimed voter fraud by the Black Panthers or anyone else would have really changed the outcome in either Pennsylvania or Ohio in 2008. In 2004, Bush got 19% of the vote in Philadelphia, and McCain got a little over 16% in 2008. And Ohio tends to vote for the winner in every presidential election, and Obama won by a handy margin in both popular and electoral votes nationwide, also narrowly pulled Ohio along. If the Black Panthers or anyone thinks that voter fraud helped to tip the election, then they’re giving themselves way too much credit. Obama won the election by close to 10 million more popular votes and a near 2 to 1 electoral vote landslide. A few dishonest folks stuffing some precinct ballot boxes wouldn’t really change that figure very much.

    Election fraud is wrong and criminal. But, I don’t see where it could change the outcome very much with an Obama win this big in 2008 where the election wasn’t even very close. Only in a very close election could  election fraud become a critical issue if there was only a vote difference of a few hundred votes in some state to win that state’s electoral votes.

    It should be noted that since 1953, only six people have been convicted of illegal voting in Ohio elections and gone to prison. That tiny illegal voting figure certainly pales against Obama’s 200,000 vote win in Ohio or his 500,000 vote win in Pennsylvania.