17 August 2008

Cristi Adkins and a Clumsy Smear or Two

Before we go much further, I'd like to post a background reminder:

On 15 May, the Republican National Committee registered the website, “ClintonsforMcCain.”

Cristi Adkins, the public face of Clintons4McCain, joined an online Hillary Clinton Meetup group on 16 May.

On 5 June, Sarah Lai Stirland from Wired published the story, In Appeal to Angry Clinton Voters, Republicans Prep ClintonsforMcCain.com.” Prior to this date, Stirland had emailed the RNC a series of questions about the "ClintonsforMcCain" site. The RNC did not reply to Stirland's emails.

On 4 June, the day before Wired posted Stirland's story, a fresh site, “Clintons4McCain,” appeared. This is Adkins's site. (T. S. reminds me to remind you, reader, that Adkins also met with Senator McCain earlier this summer).

Because of the RNC's involvement with "ClintonsforMcCain," many have been suspicious about "Clintons4McCain" and view Adkins as a GOP "operative." Adkins denies that she’s Republican; however, she’s employing some questionable tactics in supporting her preferred candidate, Senator Clinton. In actuality, rather than actively support either Clinton or McCain, she prefers to actively smear Senator Obama. Case in point: in spring and summer 2008, she appears to have actively participated in/propelled one of the more disreputable anti-Obama operations.

In my previous entry, I posted information regarding various websites registered to a “Jonathan Davis,” which appears to be the pseudonym of man named M. Donovan. "Davis's" sites began to emerge beginning 26 May. The “Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric,” or “CAACR,’ also appeared about this time. The group's vehemence alarmed much of the public--both liberals and conservatives--after it released an anti-Obama commercial, consisting of manipulated footage from an Obama speech, in Montana and South Dakota just prior to the states' primaries. As a result of the outrage, the group's advertisement, and its site, vanished quickly. Therefore, we only have records of mainstream media and bloggers mentioning the organization. However, we do know that Mike Donovan acted as “contact” for the group should anyone desire information.

The first message about CAACR appeared on 9 May at a site dedicated to the idea that Barack Obama is the anti-Christ from the Book of Revelations:

caacrdotcom said...

If you are a Christian you need to see this video...
go to www.caacr.com
if the clip is gone, request to view it from the founding members.

Obama may not be the antichrist, but is most definately spewing anti christian language to Muslim groups as posted by Muslim Bridges...

May 9, 2008 7:26 PM

As CAACR is long time down, it’s impossible to confirm anything about this particular video. It isn't the clip used in Montana and South Dakota, however, as that ad relied on audio. The ad discussed at the "Obama as anti-Christ" site appears to adapt from Obama’s letter to the organization Muslim Bridges, a group whose stated purpose "is to Build Bridges - to promote Peace and Dialogue through Proactive Interactions at individual and organizational levels."

Ten days later, someone called "Founding Fathers" alerts posters to the website and video while visiting Fox’s website for Greta Van Susteran:

Founding Fathers
May 19th, 2008 at 10:29 pm

Obama is continually attempting to subdue our voices so that he can obtain a subtle ‘control’ over the masses. Yet, not so subtle is his anti-christian values.
Please log onto http://www.caacr.com and weigh in on his speech where he speaks in front of a group, Muslim Bridges.

He states that this is no longer a Christian nation…
Then he mocks us for believing in Angels…
And, he tells the Muslim Bridges group that we ’stone our children’ and ‘endorse slavery’

And the more he can get us to ‘lay off his wife’ the more he can get us to cling to our religion.

Go to http://www.caacr.com and find out more.
Go to the Presidential Rhetoric page…

Again, as the website is down, we can only go by what the poster says about it. In alluding to Obama’s “subtle ‘control’ over the masses,” “Founding Fathers” touches on one of Cristi Adkins’s most favored arguments: that Obama employs mass hypnosis to sway voters to support him.

At this point, CAACR chose to extend its message beyond the internet and sets about creating a commercial to air in South Dakota and Montana. Cristi Adkins, who was involved in setting up “Count All Votes” and “Votergate 08,” issues a plea for funds on the Hillary Clinton Meetup site. The subject refers to a “NOBAMA” ad in the works:

From: cristi adkins
Sent on: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:30 PM
New Ad Donations: Please send inquiries to [address removed]

There is a new ad circulating brought to the attention of Count All Votes.org and they have asked me to request donations for this ad to appear before the June 3 primaries in S Dakota and Montana. If you are in favor of a NOBAMA ad, support democracy, national security and want to see the right nominee in the DNC, please contact [address removed] and find out how you can contribute to this ad. It is a last ditch effort to show the real Obama before the voters go to the poll on Tuesday.


When a contributor expresses interest in viewing the ad, Adkins responds with the following message (sent May 29, 8:49 am):

The ad is in it’s final stages…I’ll forward your message to the Founding Fathers of the PAC


From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of [redacted]
Sent: None
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [hrclinton-32] NOBAMA television ad

I sent them an email.
I would like to see the ad.

While the messages neglect to mention CAARC, we can confirm that “Count All Votes” did not release a television commercial, but a few days later, the CAACR ad, which had been “in it’s [sic] final stages” on 29 May, was broadcast in Montana.

Here is the CAACR television ad.

Shortly after the ad aired, Adkins brought the media response to her fellow Meetup group members' attention:

Top NBC Montana story


cristi adkins

Sent on:

Tuesday, June 3, 2008 5:50 AM

NBC Montana led with the ad as their top story. Here is a link to the written copy. VERY interesting….


Ad: www.caacr.com/News.html

We have evidence then, that Adkins was both aware and supportive of the ad. Recall, as well, that immediately after the ad aired, CAACR encountered some pretty severe fallout (for examples, see here, here, and here. For blog examples, Google the Coalition's name). Consequently, Mike Donovan, who had been scheduled to appear on the Neil Cavuto show to discuss CAACR, was disinvited:

RE: [hrclinton-32] Neil Cavuto Drops Obama Bomb Monday June 2, 4 PM Fox News


cristi adkins

Sent on:

Monday, June 2, 2008 1:53 PM

I called the Cavuto show myself and they said they will not be interviewing Mike Donovan of the Caacr.com because of problems with the ad. I asked her if there would be any other information revealed today and she said she’d call me back…no word yet

That’s what I know at this time.

And this despite Adkins’s call for prayers, or, at least, a “higher consciousness” to aid Mike Donovan the night before his planned Cavuto appearance.

Now, take a listen once more to the CAACR television ad.
Next, please visit this website and listen to welcome page's voiceover. Unless my hearing is quite mistaken, it’s the same voice.

It belongs to Cristi Adkins’s husband, Burke Allen (Burke Allen Adkins).

Recently, bloggers have defended Adkins as the victim of "Obama bloggers," of undeserved attacks and accusations; I read these, and then I think about her record of supporting (at least endorsing) political smear jobs. It seems to me that Adkins and Donovan, and, quite likely, a few other associates, appear to have have consistently targeted Obama and pushed questionable stories into the media; if one item doesn't effectively stir the voting public, it gets swept under the rug and they move to the next. The only outrages they haven't covered yet are drugs, gay sex, and murder. Oh, wait. . .nevermind.

It is my opinion, my guess, that this league of Virginian tricksters, if it is such, shall continue apace until November, so get ready folks. They just might get dirtier the closer we get to the end of the election season.

UPDATE: Adkins appeared on a radio program tonight to announce that she was unable to attract media attention to Larry Sinclair, and so she will not be pursuing the Sinclair angle in attacking Obama. Kudos to Cristi.

UPDATE: Please read the post in response to "NPR Defender" below.

Found! Here is the CAACR's press release.

UPDATE (8/27/08): Confirmed!
NPR's "Secret Money" project on the CAACR.

ASIDE: It should be evident, but I should note that none of this is conclusive: this series of posts has presented a largely circumstantial case that, I believe, point towards Ms. Adkins's possible participation in a variety of activities that argue against Obama's candidacy. If Ms Adkins should wish to present her "side" of things or to alert posters of any corrections, she is welcome--and encouraged--to do so by contacting mp&gs via email.


Anonymous said...

Dear MPandGS,

I happened to stumble across your blog this morning while doing some research of my own. The connections you have drawn out concerning the CAACR video and Cristi Adkins are accurate. I know because I am the videographer that produced the "Obama Rhetoric Video" as it was so named, for the Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric, or CAACR. I can not speak of some of the other connections you have made.

Here's how things unfolded:

-Cristi Adkins approached us in February asking for a quote to produce a 30 second smear ad against Obama (for the CAACR). We quoted the job but they then declined due to the cost.

-We were approached again in late May for the same ad, except this time, we were told that someone (Mike Donovan) was able to raise the funds. We were to have the video completed in time to air the commercial prior to the primaries in South Dakota and Montana. We debated if we wanted to do the work because some of the imagery described was questionnable. Mike D. was presented to us as the financier, and as such, had creative control of the project. Mike discussed the video with us, and after providing an outline, we agreed to do the production since the imagery had been toned down.

-Mike drafted a "script" of the commercial and provided us with the photos used in the video. We were instructed to also use a video clip from YouTube which was a speech Obama gave on religion.

-We began production on Wednesday, May 28th. We had to do some deletions of the script in order to reach the 30 second target, but working with Mike via phone, youtube.com, and e-mail we finally developed the finished ad.

-On Friday, May 30th we had the video transferred to BetaCam tapes and sent them via UPS them to Allen Media Strategies (for delivery on Monday June 2. I sent it to them b/c Burke had purchased media time for the commercial per Mike's request. We also uploaded the video to a YouTube Account (caacrvideos) that Mike had set up. Finally we sent a high res copy to Mike and Burke via a site called USendIt.com

-Payment for the video was to be paid net 14 days after delivery per a contract between us and the CAACR, drafted and signed my Mike Donovan. Mike has not paid anything toward the debt and it is my understanding that he has never paid Burke for the media buy, either.

-The video almost immediately got a negative response. I think that it aired one time on television (not sure of the station), but it was reported that other TV stations refused to play it due to complaints from the Obama campaign (concerning the fact that the speech was "modified")

-Almost immediately after Hillary lost the nomination, the CAACR website went black (I think it was June 3 or 4) and the media alerts that had listed Mike D. as the media rep were pulled. I began to contact both Allen Media Strategies and Mike D. because I was concerned about not receiving payment for our services. There were several reasons that were given for the site going down, everthing from those involved receiving threats to a possible negative story that was going to be published by the New York Times.

-When confronted about the identities of people in the CAACR, Christi refused to state who was involved (excluding Mike Donovan). She stated that the CAACR were friends of hers and that she occasionally did work for them. She admitted that:
1. She set up the CAACR website
2. She initiated the request for the video production
3. She promoted the video and approved of its content on behalf of the CAACR.

-Since the CAACR website was shut down we (the video production co) have attempted to collect payment for the video from Michael Donovan (unsuccessfully). We have also been unsuccessful in determining a physical address for him, so we have not been able to file suit for non-payment. Ultimately, we WERE successful in negotiating a resolution with Allen Media Strategies and they have honored the agreements made so far.

mpandgs said...

Thank you for posting!

I am glad that you were able to achieve a settlement and retrieve payment for your work. And I am very glad that you've confirmed this story-it rather proves people's suspicions about Adkins.

Maybe you should phone Neil Cavuto?
Thanks again!

Anonymous said...

Oh, my! Cristi et al seem to have forgotten that there are laws surrounding federal elections.


Coward, post your names

mpandgs said...

(removed from blog posts. Originally published 8/18/08)

Someone posing as an NPR reporter just posted a comment in defense of Cristi Adkins to the blog. The comment accused another commentor of slander and revealed two mens’ names in the process. The comment has been removed because, at this point in time, there is no way of confirming the poster’s claim and we can’t justify posting private citizens’ personal information on this blog.
Lest m, p, & g s be accused of hypocrisy, please note that the information posted here has been drawn from online (public) sources and does not consist of making sourceless claims against private citizens.

Aside: The comment’s quality of the writing and the questionable assertions gives pause in believing it came from a journalist, but a copy of the comment has been available for the “real” reporter should she or he choose to contact this blog.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...
If you haven't done so already, please check the Mitch and Nan Show post from tonight:

Apparently, she has been exchanging emails with one of the site's bloggers and said that she was going to report Mike Donovan to the NPR last night.

Anonymous said...


Coward, post your names


The NPR Defender thinks people should use their names!

Anonymous said...

NPR Defender, you can call me "Annie" for short.

Nick Thomas said...

Hello again...I am the videographer that was hired to produce the CAACR video. There was a response made to my post by an anonymous person who posed several questions to me, accused me of slandering Cristi Adkins, made some accusations about my credibility and was portraying themselves as an NPR reporter, all the while using my real name and the name of my business partner. I happened to see the post before mpandgs pulled it. Now, NPR DEFENDER seems to be calling me a coward because he/she wants me to use my name. Ask and ye shall receive....read on.

First let me say that there is no intention of slander in my previous post. I simply sought to clarify actual facts in this case so that no assumptions would be drawn which might be false or misleading. Cristi did speak to a reporter and that same reporter later contacted me for my side of the story. I felt that since she was willing to communicate the story to him, then she must be willing for everyone to know how things unfolded.

Additionally, if NPR DEFENDER took the time to read my post thoroughly, he or she would see that I have placed Mike Donovan as the central figure in quesiton. For example, I noted that 1) Burke bought media time per Mike's request 2) Mike donovan wrote the script, provided the content, wrote the contract and failed to pay the debt afterwards and 3) Mike set up the youtube account, to name a few examples. On Cristi's behalf I noted that she had worked out an agreement with us to get our debt paid (which I thought was fair).

Another comment made by this person was "if we thought the video was so 'slanderous' (or something to that effect) then why did we choose to do it? The fact here is that we refused the work several times. It was only after some discussion of the video content with Cristi and Mike, and some content changes that we agreed to do the job. I made the decision to do the work because 1) we were interested in doing work outside of the wedding videos we normally produce, in hopes of growing our fledgling business 2) It was a well-paying job that would help our company's cash flow, and 3) ultimately, I felt that it was not my place to question our client's political views. If I were a painter and my customer asked me to paint their house hot pink, all the while offering me top dollar to do so, I would paint the house hot pink, regardless if I thought it was a bad color choice.

Additionally, I have spoken to the reporter that I mentioned above. He stated he DID NOT contribute the comments made. He stated to me, "why would a writer tell everyone he was going to write a story before he wrote it?".

Also, this person made an accusation that Mike Donovan and I were under a federal investigation. This is an outright lie, as I am only guilty of performing work per my client's request. I have not been involved in illegal activities, and therefore I have nothing to hide from any authority.

Finally, I enjoy the same right to freedom of speech that Cristi uses in her protest of Senator Obama. The things I have stated are factual and I can back them up with evidence. Therefore, what I've said is, in no way, slander.

Here is a link to my website: www.videoartistrync.com
I invite anyone interested to visit our website. If you have any comments regarding this post please respond via this blog, rather than using my business e-mail.

So, NPR DEFENDER...the ball's in your court. Why don't you use YOUR name? I have a feeling I know it already.

Anonymous said...

Videographer guy
As far as I see it
Nothing you wrote is slanderous.

your first comment says the she was really involved in the ad set up. So she was in cahoots with this Donovan guy. Is Donovan one of Bossie's boys?

Thanks though. Alot!

Anonymous said...

Cristi's gonna ruin Burke Allen's business reputation. He needs to get her under control! Quickly!

Anonymous said...

The vid man says they approached him in Feruary. Looks like the group was active then:
We Humbly Request an Apology From Senator Obama
26 Feb 2008 by CAACR
We Request an Apology From Senator Obama and thank the mydd.com members for bringing it to our attention. By American Christian Coalition - Feb 25th, 2008 at 8:51 pm EST. As brought to our attention recently by an anonymous source, ...
MyDD - http://www.mydd.com/section/Diary

The page is gone but teh google has the blurb

Anonymous said...

It looks like Burke Allen did the voiceover for the CAACR video! So he is a part of this!


Anonymous said...

What is the difference whether she is a republican or ex-democrat? The guy is not fit to run our country, period! This smear of Larry Sinclair has been out there before Cristi was involved or even knew about it. Look it up in Nov of 2007, way before the media was aware of it. The democrats that were for Hillary found the smear and made sure that the surrogates of Hillary knew and needed to correct this scandal. Many of the delegates were advised of this scandal -nothing was done. And now making Cristi Adkins the scapegoat-is nonense! Ask yourself- if this is nothing but a smear- then why hasn't Obama put this scandal in his fighthesmear website? Maybe it is because he would finally say deny it and a surprise package would show up to override his lie. Obama is smart in letting the scandal alone- he knows what can of can of worms he will open if he does. Don't blame the messenger- and who cares if she is republican-

Anonymous said...

We don 't need a man who sleeps with other man for the presidency. Enough of these liberals! Tell Obama to deny this allegation and maybe his ratings will go back up otherwise I see the old man winning. Nobody wants a sissy for President.

mpandgs said...

What is the difference whether she is a republican or ex-democrat? The guy is not fit to run our country, period!

* Nobody argues with her political beliefs. And if someone thinks Obama isn't presidential material, good enough. fine. Have a debate on THAT issue rather than engage in dirty tricks. This is where people question Ms. Adkins: is she is engaged in such tricks.

This smear of Larry Sinclair has been out there before Cristi was involved or even knew about it. Look it up in Nov of 2007, way before the media was aware of it.

* perhaps _you_ should look it up. Larry Sinclair only appeared on the scene in January, 2008. Prior to that, he never made a public claim. In fact, if you read Mr. Sinclair's site, listen to his radio appearances, or even speak to him, he will say be spoke to

The democrats that were for Hillary found the smear and made sure that the surrogates of Hillary knew and needed to correct this scandal.

*Everyone familiar with this smear knows that Sinclair's supporters did their level best to alert delegates to Sinclair's allegations.
What you mean by "correct this scandal," I'm not sure.

Many of the delegates were advised of this scandal -nothing was done. And now making Cristi Adkins the scapegoat-is nonense!
* Nobody is making Cristi the scapegoat of this scandal. Few think Cristi Adkins invented the Sinclair rumors. Again, people are wondering if/why she is engaged in dirty tricks by her recent allegiance to him. That's all.

Ask yourself- if this is nothing but a smear- then why hasn't Obama put this scandal in his fighthesmear website? Maybe it is because he would finally say deny it and a surprise package would show up to override his lie.

* I'm sure you know exactly why he hasn't addressed this "when did you stop beating your wife" question.

What package? Are you privy to special information?

Obama is smart in letting the scandal alone- he knows what can of can of worms he will open if he does. Don't blame the messenger- and who cares if she is republican-

* When the messenger can't get her facts straight about the Sinclair story (when it appeared, for example), there's plenty to blame.

Anonymous said...

You are wrong- because we at this household knew of this in 2007- maybe you were one of those that picked up after the youtube fiasco of Larry's. Obama is bi-sexual- so what! He is a liberal- look at television and you will find "reality shows showing women tonguing each other and men." Nothing new with the liberals out there! Who the hell wants these type of behaviors for our children. My G-d- some of us find religion, marry and stop doing all these iniquities later on in life. Maybe Obama was one of these unfortunate characters. But, he needs to stop this rumor- just like the ties with Bill Ayers, the 20 years of pretending to be listening to the world of G-d, having too close relationship with our middleeast friends and "for crying outloud- win the election"-not thinking that he is President without winning. It is the arrogance that has turned off the american people. It is his cocky attitude that turns us off. Let us be real clear- that if it wasn't for the Pelosi hit squad- Mrs. Clinton would be selecting her VP today. This man will never step one foot in the whitehouse! 20% of Hillary's unstoppable (even if she is the VP) will not vote for this man- and the conservative right will breathe in the breath of righteousness and will blow this man back to the streets of Chicago to get some more experience!

mpandgs said...

And how did you hear of this in 2007?
Nevermind. Something tells me I won't be given evidence.

Considering the nature of the rest of this comment--a loose homophobic rant--I was going to remove it. However, I'm letting it stand because I think it's rather revelatory.

mpandgs said...

And Ms Adkins, you're always welcome to email mpandgs (at) gmail dot com to discuss your perspective.

Anonymous said...

homophobic rant- I doubt it-have gays in my family. Just know when G-d gives you an enlightment. Something liberals would not understand. Just like we knew of his arab prayers singing in front of an interview two years before you probably knew about it. Just like we knew about his frequent visits in Kenya with Odinga. Many things are known and when they come to surface- people believe they are recent and they are old news. Pen soldering has been actively since he threw his hat into the bucket and most of the pen soldiers on the internet know everything we need to know about Obama. The book Obamanation is old news for most of us who have made it our business to protect our country, child. Haven't you noticed the polls? The news of his past is being read more by the cult members and alot are leaving him. No. I am not a republican- 30 years being a democrat- yes this evil party that we call democrat- and yes- I rather vote republican then to have a left-left-liberal governing us. Hope Cristi keeps showing the world more brairs and thorns on this man's body. Period! Oh, by the way, thank you for leaving my remarks. You are a gentlemen and a scholar.

mpandgs said...

You make a series of unsubstantiated claims. If you could offer some evidence, I might be more "persuadable."

You didn't answer my question about how you heard about these rumors in 2007.

Nonetheless, what we do is agree to disagree, and leave it at that.

Thank you for stopping by and for taking the time to comment.

Anonymous said...

If, in fact, the "shadowy" forces behind CAACR.com pulled the ad, did they do so because of pressure from the Obama campaign? I think that this deserves much more research.

mpandgs said...

Anonymous @ 05:28:
Here's a response to your question:
" A group called the Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric paid for the ad, which stations quickly dropped after the Obama campaign complained."

Additionally,there is a post, "Some Brief CAACR Followup," that also addresses your question.

I've an open offer to CAACR to contact me and discuss "their side," even on an anonymous basis. So far, nothing.

Anonymous said...

I am curious what G-d means? If Anonymous intended that to mean God, then why not use the word "God". Sounds anti-Christian to me. (No pun intended)

mpandgs said...

This might help you Anonymous @ 23:11:
"Orthodox Orthography: Why No 'O' in 'G-d'?" from Beliefnet:


Anonymous said...

Mega Cristi Meltdown in Denver


mpandgs said...

I saw that, thank you. I'll post something on it a bit later.

Someone has emailed me already asking if the "congressional investigator" was Bossie. It's a suggestion worth exploring.

Anotheronymous said...

Great stuff. Looks like you've stirred the hornets' nest. Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

Adkins has alot of msm aatention now but nobody can spell her name right...can they? Hmmm. Lets see
Chrissie Atkins..Christy Adkin..Cristy Atkins
15 minutes and counting down.
da da dadada...I'm lovin' it

Steve Parry said...

This is mildly humorous. You realize that some of the articles to which you have linked are for sale, right? I didn't read them because I shouldn't have to pay for you to air your grievance.

I don't know if you have noticed or not, but there is a Presidential Election going on. If you feel these things being said are "smears" against a good Candidate, why not just post the contradictory evidence? Instead, you go after a private citizen who may or may not be behind them?

This is where your side is doing more harm than good for your candidate. Understand how it looks to the average reader when you attack the alleged messenger rather than defend the Candidate from the charges.

Now, as a McCain supporter, I feel that there is a really good reason why you have chosen the path that you did. Many Obama supporters have weighed in. But we are not the ones who really matter. To the undecided voter, understand this. They have clearly made their case. And the case is not that their guy is innocent of the allegations, but rather that some woman who may or may not have been behind them isn't playing fair by talking about them.

mpandgs said...

Steve Parry,
Thanks for seeing the humor.

Found the link that you referred (to a pay to view article), and it’s been amended. We aim for live, free links, so we appreciate the alert. Did you hit the link to the NPR story? Just wondering.

Of course you’re correct in noting that it’s always preferable to “build up” a candidate rather than critique the smears themselves. However, please note that smears on all candidates are discussed and "debunked" on the blog, just not in this particular post. The focus here isn’t on the candidate, but how smears get ‘round. What motivates the people who start them (Money? Ideology? Emotion? Faith?)? Do we go into detail on all smears? No. Only the ones that intrigue, and the idea of presenting Obama as a satanic muslim is pretty intriguing.

I’m not sure if she’s a private citizen (and these matters certainly don’t involve her personal life, rather, those activities related to her work as a media figure). From the Clintons4McCain website: “frequent FOX NEWS CHANNEL television and radio contributor, Cristi Adkins is a spokesperson and co-founder for Clintons4McCain.com.” If we were talking about a private citizen's activities, you have an argument, sure, but we’re talking about a public figure who appears regularly on political programming.

Thanks for stopping by, and thanks for commenting.