Man behind robocalls against Evan McMullin apologizes

In this October 2016 file photo, independent presidential candidate Evan McMullin speaks during a rally in Draper, Utah. Two months after he jumped into the presidential race as a political unknown, McMullin was surging in Utah polls and drawing large crowds of Republican-leaning voters fed up with Donald Trump’s crudeness and antics, Draper, Utah, Oct. 21, 2016 | Associated Press photo by Rick Bowmer, St. George News

ST. GEORGE The man behind robocalls to Utahns asking them to support Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump over independent candidate Evan McMullin apologized for the “mean-spirited message” and shut the calls down.

William Johnson, a self-identified white nationalist and Trump supporter, issued a statement Wednesday apologizing in the wake of many – including the Trump campaign – denouncing the robocalls.

In the call, Johnson said he believed McMullin was likely a “closet homosexual” due to his being 40 and unmarried. He also made note of McMullin’s mother being married to a woman, saying “Evan has two mommies” and that he supported same-sex marriage and was “an open-borders ancestry supporter.”

McMullin told Fox 13 News Tuesday that while his mother is indeed married to another woman, they do not agree on the matter of same-sex marriage. As to being 40 and unmarried with no children, McMullin told the Salt Lake Tribune his 11-year career in the CIA hadn’t lent well to dating.

In Johnson’s statement apologizing for the robocall, he said, “I am sorry for the mean-spirited message and I humbly retract its contents.”

Johnson goes on to explain why he made the calls to Utah voters – which includes a worry about low rates of marriage and births among white people.

I sent the robocalls out because Utah is a strong family-values state and America and the West is gripped by an extreme and fatal malady: failure to marry and have children. The white birth rate is so astonishingly low that Western Civilization will soon cease to exist. I felt that Evan McMullin typified that perfidious mentality.

McMullin has yet to respond to the apology, though in a series of Tweets he posted in response to the robocall, he said it was another “desperate attack” spreading “baseless lies” by Trump’s “racist supporters.”

“Just as Donald Trump has issued a heart-felt apology for his past locker room talk, I too issue a heartfelt apology for this robocall,” Johnson said. “I should not have sent it out. I am truly sorry.”

The calls started going out Monday night to voters in Utah, where polls show McMullin is threatening Trump.

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

Email: mkessler@stgnews.com

Twitter: @MoriKessler

Copyright St. George News, SaintGeorgeUtah.com LLC, 2016, all rights reserved.

 

 

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!

27 Comments

  • Bob November 2, 2016 at 7:41 pm

    will McMullin be the republican’s ralph nader and secure a glorious victory for hillary? lol. seriously who cares?

    • .... November 2, 2016 at 10:50 pm

      That pretty much sums up your comment ! lol seriously nobody cares !

  • Henry November 2, 2016 at 8:25 pm

    Does McMullin have the temperament and judgment to be President? He now refers to “Trump’s ‘racist supporters’”, which sounds very similar to Hillary calling Trump supporters “deplorables…racist, sexist,…”

    We shouldn’t be surprised that McMullin is agreeing with Hillary. If you read McMullin’s official website, he says “TPP (the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership) has the strongest protections for labor and the environment of any major trade deal. That is one of the reasons that Hillary Clinton described it as the “gold standard” of trade agreements.” What other issues are McMullin and Hillary in agreement?

    On this evening’s Fox Business channel, McMullin was interviewed 1-on-1 by the host of the primetime show “Kennedy”. McMullin revealed that he supported individual states voting on the legalization of both heroin and marijuana. Doesn’t sound like the position of a “real conservative”.

    It would be an understatement to say that the interview didn’t go well. McMullin appeared openly antagonistic to the interviewer, yet thin-skinned when questions. The interviewer, who originally appeared sympathetic, ended up calling McMullin a “dingbat”. I can hardly wait for him to be interviewed by Anderson Cooper or Chris Mathews.

    • KarenS November 2, 2016 at 9:35 pm

      I have seen Evan McMullin interviewed many times on all of the national shows including Chris Matthews and Joe Scarborough. He is articulate and well-spoken and seems very genuine. He was on Meet the Press on Sunday and was questioned by the whole panel of journalists, even Larry Kudlow, a Trump economic supporter. He answered each question carefully and thoughtfully. I’m voting for Hillary but I think Evan will go far and will have a great future.

      • Henry November 3, 2016 at 8:43 am

        After the recent WikiLeaks revelations of unprecedented levels of corruption, how could anyone vote for Hillary?

        • RealMcCoy November 3, 2016 at 4:35 pm

          It’s simple:
          When have facts ever mattered to a democrat?

          • Henry November 3, 2016 at 8:09 pm

            LOL, sure seems true with current-day Democrats.

      • ladybugavenger November 3, 2016 at 9:42 pm

        Even criminals get votes? She’s over the top corrupt.

    • Brian November 3, 2016 at 5:20 am

      Wait, so you’re saying that leaving issues up to the states isn’t a conservative ideal, and that things that aren’t explicitly spelled out in the Constitution should be handled by the federal government (exactly the opposite of what the Constitution says in the 10th Amendment)?

      It sounds like Evan McMullin is a conservative and you aren’t…

      • Henry November 3, 2016 at 7:48 am

        I believe anyone who would consider legalizing heroin to either be an idiot or delusional, not a conservative. It has no recreational or medicinal uses like marijuana; the societal impacts of heroin legalization would be disasterous. Would you also support states legalizing meth?

        • Brian November 3, 2016 at 10:51 am

          I don’t think heroine or meth or marijuana should be legalized, but if anything happens on any of those, or ANYTHING else that isn’t specifically given to the federal government, it should happen at the state level. That is what the Constitution says, and that is what I think is best.

          That is all McMullin was saying: it’s a states rights issue. He isn’t FOR legalizing heroine, he’s just saying IF someone wants to push that, it belongs at the state level.

          Consequently, healthcare belongs at the state level, too. My obamacare premiums are set to go up 31% next year, so I’m jumping ship on obamacare. I can’t be a part of that lunacy.

          • Henry November 3, 2016 at 2:31 pm

            I consider McMullin’s response evasive and timid. If he doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to say that a drug as destructive as heroin should not even be considered for legalization, how is he going to stand up to a Pelosi or a Putin?

            The video of the interview is available via Google search. It’s about 5 1/2 minutes long. People should view it and judge for themselves if Evan McMullin is Presidential material.

          • Chris November 4, 2016 at 8:14 am

            So, both you and Henry believe in the “nanny state” in which government dictates what we can do with or put in our bodies. Considering their obvious costs to human health and to society, how can you support the legality of tobacco and alcohol?

          • whatever November 4, 2016 at 2:35 pm

            Chris, you raise a very valid question that would take several pages to adequately address. Here’s a brief, VERY simplified version: We don’t have to choose between the extremes of a nanny-state of no legalized drugs and the chaos of all legalized drugs. I would broadly favor legalization and/or decriminalization of soft drugs, while keeping hard drugs illegal (users treated through clinics and/or imprisoned).

            Soft drugs include alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana. Soft drugs can be used for recreation, as well as medical purposes. They aren’t physically addictive (perhaps psychologically) for most people. Used in small quantities, soft drugs usually only incapacitate the user for a short period (wake up with a hangover the next morning); overdosing won’t kill a user. Soft drug users can hold steady jobs, raise children, and aren’t a threat to fellow citizens. Government can regulate production and enforce potency and dosage; it can also publicize the adverse health effects of usage.

            Hard drugs include heroin, cocaine, and meth. Hard drugs aren’t used recreationally; they’re very physically addictive. Hard drugs take over a user’s life; they can’t hold a job or take care of their kids, and are willing to endanger their fellow citizens to satisfy their need. An accidental overdose will likely kill a hard drug user; there are no reliably safe levels of intake.

            So for me, the dangers of hard drugs to users and to society are so high that they should not be legalized.

  • mmsandie November 2, 2016 at 8:35 pm

    I got one of those calls and thought it had to be a wacko calling, very rude. Glad they found him and apologized, I still won,t be biting for trump

  • Bob November 2, 2016 at 9:25 pm

    just did a quick read on mcmullin: Investment Banking Division at Goldman Sachs, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, 10 year CIA, on and on. i suspect the CIA may be one of the world’s most evil organizations. was this guy planted by the hillary camp or what?

  • Bob November 2, 2016 at 9:44 pm

    “McMullin joined the CIA as a student trainee while an undergraduate at Brigham Young University. He would alternate semesters between the university and training at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. During that time, he spent a year in Israel and Jordan learning Arabic. He also worked for a refugee resettlement program run by the United Nations.”

    So he’s lived in the zionist state. worked for zionist bank Goldman. worked for the UN. wouldn’t be at all surprised if he was a CIA recruiter for ISIS. this guy is a total zionist shill. he might as well work for hillary

    • Ron November 3, 2016 at 9:31 am

      Bob, I concur with you on those points. You forgot to add the term “globalist” to your list.
      Yes, McMullin is a shill for Hillary. Being LDS and a former CIA agent does not make a “great President”,
      or even a mediocre President. Sadly, many Utahns will be misled into voting for Hillary.
      McMullin will have no impact whatsoever on this crazy election.

  • Harry November 2, 2016 at 10:00 pm

    Saying, “I’m voting third party” in an election year is meant to portray someone as free-thinking or too personally virtuous to stain their hands with the evil that is the “establishment” candidate. If a third party candidate is so important, where was that candidate during the primary? Why didn’t they have to go through the same test by fire that the other candidates had to?

    Voting third party, isn’t a virtue. It has no tangible benefit in an election, and usually produces almost no discernible effect, and when it does, it usually provides the opposite effect than what the voter intended. Ross Perot gave us Bill Clinton. Third party voters try to convey to everyone that they are doing what a good voter should do by voting their conscience and rejecting the establishment candidates. Voting third party is a token gesture meant to imply that the person doing it has literally done the best they could with the options available. But they haven’t, and they’ve missed an important point, they’ve forgotten that the election isn’t about them, it’s about the country.

    Voting third party does nothing except prop up the sanctimonious reflection looking back at you in the mirror.

    • Brian November 3, 2016 at 5:28 am

      If you’re willing to vote for Trump or Clinton because they are the establishment candidate, so long as you view them as not as bad as the other candidate, who or what aren’t you willing to vote for?

      I’m voting for the person who best represents my values and belief in the Constitution as the Founders intended it, regardless of party or strategy. That is my standard. What is yours?

      Blindly following parties is the exact reason we have such horrible candidates to choose from this election, and exactly what has led to so many attrocities

    • Brian November 3, 2016 at 5:29 am

      If you’re willing to vote for Trump or Clinton because they are the establishment candidate, so long as you view them as not as bad as the other candidate, who or what aren’t you willing to vote for?

      I’m voting for the person who best represents my values and belief in the Constitution as the Founders intended it, regardless of party or strategy. That is my standard. What is yours?

      Blindly following parties is the exact reason we have such horrible candidates to choose from this election, and exactly what has led to so many atrocities in history (think Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s). Blindly following a party is the real wasted vote.

      • Henry November 3, 2016 at 8:57 am

        I voted for Trump because I believe he best supports American interests on the major issues – immigration, trade, economics, and the military. Read McMullin’s website – his stance on those issues is more aligned with the establishment (i.e., globalist and elitist, like Hillary) than with Trump.

        Ignor the hyperbole of the candidates and their entourage. Do the research about the candidates’ positions and how they will achieve their stated goals.

    • sagemoon November 3, 2016 at 10:52 am

      Are you delusional or just jaded?

      • Henry November 3, 2016 at 5:28 pm

        Harry is realistic. The delusional ones are those that think a third party candidate has even a chance of becoming President in this election.

  • mshaw November 3, 2016 at 7:24 am

    He is probably hillarys plant to help sway the votes to her or he is one of mitts buddies

  • Not_So_Much November 3, 2016 at 8:01 am

    Kudos to Brian. You nailed it when it comes to two parties in this country. Will I vote for McMullin? Perhaps or I might vote for Castle and the Constitutional Party. I will not continue to drink the kool-aid of the two major parties because they have gotten us to where we are today.

  • .... November 3, 2016 at 8:03 am

    They just as well run RealLowlife and Dumbob for president because there isn’t one of them candidates that are qualified. .LOL you couldn’t tell the difference. !

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.