Who is Behind the High-Tech Lynching of Herman Cain? (Updated)

by 1389 on November 4, 2011

in 1389 (blog admin), 2012 US Elections, Chicago, conservative, mainstream media, politics, RINOs

Also see: How David Axelrod and the Chicago Machine Smeared Herman Cain – With the help of the MSM and the GOP establishment

Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, Rick Perry

It is not about the women

The female(s) who are allegedly leaking this story are not acting on their own. Even though they have been paid in some way, they are not prostitutes in the most literal sense. Yes, demanding money in return for consensual sex is prostitution, and yes, that activity is legal or decriminalized in some jurisdictions. But demanding money after LYING about sexual acts is something entirely different: it is extortion. Extortion has also been effectively decriminalized in the US, provided that the perp is savvy enough to use our corrupt legal and regulatory system as a tool to extract money from whomever has the deepest pockets.

It is all about the “establishment Republicans”

There is no dirty trick that these RINOs won’t pull, and no lie that they won’t tell, in their quest to foist a “moderate” (actually leftist) Republican on an unwilling electorate.

If the Republican establishment truly had no part in this, then why have they not condemned this shoddy attack upon a fellow GOP candidate?

Cast of Characters in the Lynching of Herman Cain

By Donna Garner


Chris Wilson of Wilson Research Strategies has said publicly that while he was working for Herman Cain at the National Restaurant Association (NRA) in the late 1990’s that he personally saw Cain sexually harass a woman at a restaurant in Virginia although Wilson has not said exactly what he believes constituted his claim of “harassment.”


Chris Wilson was the Executive Director of the Republican Party of Texas under then-governor George W. Bush. Chris Wilson worked very closely with Karl Rove. Rove was known to us in Texas as the “master of dirty political tricks. ” I suspect that Rove taught Chris Wilson the art of deception.


Karl Rove has been accused of being the source behind countless dirty tricks, whisper campaigns, smear tactics, and character assassinations.

I have dealt personally with Karl Rove. I well remember in 1997 when we classroom teachers in Texas had written our own state curriculum standards document (Texas Alternative Document) and were gaining wide support in the national press because no classroom teachers (before or since) had ever written their own standards document. We classroom teachers did not believe the standards being steamrolled by the Texas Education Agency and the Governor’s office were good for Texas students.

In the spring of 1997, Karl Rove was brought in by Gov. George W. Bush’s staff to quiet down the controversy because Bush was on his way to the White House and was being touted as the “education President.” Karl Rove believed that Bush could not afford any bad publicity, and evidently Rove’s task was “to make it go away.”

Suddenly those State Board of Education (SBOE) members who had supported our TAD document began getting phone calls from their largest campaign contributors threatening to withdraw their support unless they backed the Governor’s document.

One of our main SBOE supporters who made his living as a healthcare provider suddenly had his office visited by both state and federal auditing agencies simultaneously. They managed to tie up his total attention for weeks during the exact time that the SBOE members needed to be focusing their attention on the all-consuming work of adopting new curriculum standards for the state of Texas. The auditors found nothing illegal.

At one particular SBOE meeting, several of the SBOE members were told by the hotel management that their room assignments had suddenly been changed. The next day the information they had exchanged in a highly confidential phone call was made known publicly and neither of them had been the ones to leak it.

Back to the Herman Cain “lynching” —


Chris Wilson was hired by Mike Toomey to do Gov. Rick Perry’s polling. Mike Toomey was Gov. Perry’s chief of staff who was behind the HPV Merck/Gardasil scandal. Mike Toomey turned out to be a lobbyist for Merck.


In 1995 Chris Wilson left the Republican Party of Texas (and Karl Rove) and went to work for pollster Tony Fabrizio.


Because Gov. Perry’s Presidential campaign was losing steam, several weeks ago (10.24.11) his team decided to hire Curt Anderson, Tony Fabrizio, et al. “Coincidentally,” it appears that Politico began working on its 10.30.11 sexual harassment hit piece against Herman Cain at about that very same time.


Who is Curt Anderson? Herman Cain told Forbes that he recalled personally telling Curt Anderson in 2003 about the sexual harassment charges at the NRA but that they were baseless. Cain felt Curt Anderson as a pollster for the NRA needed to know about the allegations.


Another big coincidence? Curt Anderson was the political director at the Republican National Committee under Haley Barbour. Haley Barbour was a member of the ad team for Mitt Romney’s campaign in 2007/2008.

On 11.2.11 two days after the Politico story broke on 10.30.11, Haley Barbour went on nationwide TV and began to pressure Cain to get the NRA to release its confidentiality agreement, thus giving the “woman” a chance to grab the national microphone.


I am not the brightest bulb in the lamp, but I can connect the dots. So can most thinking Americans.

The Republican candidates are in a heated campaign leading up to the primaries. Out of nowhere has stepped Herman Cain as the frontrunner. He is not an “establishment” sort of guy.

Chris Wilson, the “witness” (Karl Rove’s understudy, recommended to Rick Perry by unscrupulous Mike Toomey) is now working with Curt Anderson (newly hired by Perry) and Tony Fabrizio (newly hired by Perry). Fabrizio is connected to Haley Barbour (worked on Mitt Romney’s campaign in 2007/2008). Barbour is the one who is trying to pressure the Cain campaign to release the “woman accuser” so that the Politico story will grow legs and eventually “lynch” Herman Cain.


Yesterday an attorney friend who has broad experience in such cases told me that if these “women” actually had grounds for sexual harassment charges, they would have gone after Herman Cain for millions of dollars; however, but they did not.

Another good friend sent the following to me, and I believe this piece also should help those of us who are trying to look at this situation logically:


Donna —

A few years ago I met an attorney who specialized in sexual harassment cases and had represented several women who had filed sexual harassment charges against a male co-employee (often a supervisor). We talked for quite a while about that and I learned a couple of interesting things:

1. Pre-Clarence Thomas, [before the Anita Hill “lynching” of Clarence Thomas in 1991] the attorney felt that the sexual harassment laws made sense and she gladly represented a number of female clients.

Post-Clarence Thomas, she refused to represent most women that came to her because the charges were what she called “frivolous and ridiculous” — that “hostile environment” could represent something as benign as an argument and/or several other nonsexual behaviors.

2. I asked her if she ever represented any men pre- or post-Clarence Thomas. She said no — that men were generally laughed out of the courtroom regardless of the validity of the charges.


To my way of thinking either the Perry campaign, the Romney campaign, or both may be behind this “lynching” of Herman Cain.

I will also add that it is possible neither Rick Perry nor Mitt Romney may know what dirty tricks (if any) their campaigners may be doing once hired and working behind closed doors in various parts of the country. Therefore, Perry/Romney are not lying when they say they know nothing about this story. However, some of the campaigners working for them may know quite a bit about it.

Resource for parts of my article:

11.2.11 “Former Texas GOP operative says he knows about Cain harassment but wasn’t source for story” by Wayne Slater, Dallas Morning News: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/perry-watch/headlines/20111102-former-texas-gop-operative-says-he-knows-about-cain-harassment-but-wasnt-source-for-story.ece

Donna Garner


We must NEVER let the leftists tell us who we can vote for!

Oh, and by the way, “establishment Republicans” hate being called what they are.

Rush Limbaugh: Establishment Republicans Want to Redefine the Term “Conservative”

September 21, 2011


RUSH: Folks, this is a little Inside Baseball, but it’s important because he who controls the language ends up winning the debate, and it might seem like a small thing, but I have learned and I have been given to understand that the “establishment Republicans” hate the term. They don’t like being called “establishment Republicans,” and they are trying to change the term to “establishment conservatives” and in the process co-opt the definition of “conservative” and conservatism. It’s not something that you’ll notice if you watch cable news or even read. You have to be able to see the stitches on the fastball, you have to be able to read between the lines, and you have to know some stuff going on behind the scenes (and, of course, I am in a position to know these kinds of things).

So don’t doubt me on this. The establishment Republicans are the establishment Republicans. The Republican leadership is the Republican establishment, meaning the elites. They hate it and they are in the process of trying to redefine who conservatives are and what it is — and if they succeed, the conservatism that you and I hold dear will no longer be the definition of conservatism. If they succeed, the current thinking of the Republican establishment will be what is called modern day conservatism. Don’t doubt me on this. It sounds like a small thing, but in a daily ebb and flow you’ll not even see any news about this, but it’s in important because it’s crucial who controls the language, who controls the way words are defined.

You and I know that the establishment Republicans don’t like conservatives. They didn’t like Reagan. They were embarrassed of Reagan. They were embarrassed of us. They didn’t like the Moral Majority, they didn’t like the Christian right, they don’t like the pro-lifers. They don’t like the social conservatives at all. They’re embarrassed by us, in many ways, with their other buddies, the establishment Democrats — which combined gives us the Washington establishment, and they very much prefer to be members of that club than ours. But they know that it doesn’t help them to be called “establishment Republicans.” So they’re trying to take the term “conservative” and co-opt it and define it as they behave, write, speak, and even vote on matters of politics.



My conclusion? It was a setup from the get-go, with phony “witnesses” recruited well in advance and brought out as soon as Herman Cain pulled ahead in the polls.

And considering the Chicago connection, Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod undoubtedly had something to do with it also. (See links below.) That’s bipartisanship, Chicago style.


{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

1 J3 November 4, 2011 at 11:31 pm

The degree of treachery inside the RINO party never ceases to amaze me; the fact that utterly amoral men and women will do anything – anything! – to sabotage the efforts of any good, true conservative who might threaten their slimy pork-barrel career politics, is disgusting. I know that Rove is a pig, the scum de la scum, as it were, who would videotape his own mother being raped by a grizzly bear of he thought the video might advance his personal agenda. And of course we ALL know that Romney and Perry are two sides of the same RINO coin.

But what is interesting is that even polls by the leftists’ groups show that most conservatives are not allowing any of the hate-campaign against Cain, affect their support of him at all. Perhaps they have seen so much of the crap thrown at Clarence Thomas, George W, Sarah Palin, Rush, Mark Levin and others, that they simply ignore what the leftard press and TV media say and go with what they know.
And as for the swine, rove – maybe we could get Dick Cheney to take him hunting.

2 grego November 8, 2011 at 7:29 pm

“Establishment republicans hate being called what they are”, just like passive aggressives hate being called passive-aggressive. 😡

3 Bob the Barber November 9, 2011 at 7:20 pm

Here appears to be another rogue for the gallery. Obama’s fingerprints are on this as well. Bialek claimed on Fox and Friends that she didn’t know Axelrod other than to wave at the gym. This proves otherwise.


4 Northlander November 10, 2011 at 2:11 am

Romney was feeding crap to the press about Palin in the last election. Now he’s up to his old tricks. Romney doner is the guy who took Cain’s place when he left the restaraunt association. Romney looked great in the last election because McCain looked so awful. I won’t vote for Cain in the primaries. I’m not sure who I’ll vote for but it sure won’t be Romney. He has a dictator mentality.

5 Outsider November 12, 2011 at 4:58 pm

After having refreshed myself on Watergate anything is possible! Looking at Bialek from a woman’s point of view why would she agree to meet Herman Cain? After all being unemployed she surely didn’t have money for needless travel. Anything Herman could have done for her could have been discussed over the phone. I believe that she went there prepared to do anything in order to secure a job.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: