Media complicit in Omar cover up

David Steinberg:

Three years ago, most American newsrooms picked Ilhan Omar -- despite her crawling Jew-hatred and evidence of an extensive criminal past -- to be the transcendent face America needed to fight bigotry and federal corruption. Reporters apparently chose to lie about Omar to help birth a more trusting country.

Perfectly irrational idiocy. Legacy newsmedia, decayed, perhaps brought itself final ruin by getting exactly what it wanted.

The first Somali-born woman and the first female Muslim to be elected to a U.S. statehouse, Ilhan Omar defeated 44-year incumbent Phyllis Kahn in the Democrat-Farmer-Labor primary for Minnesota House District 60B in 2016. A former child refugee from civil war, Omar was perceived as a best-case image for shepherding progressive causes against President Trump. Ilhan Omar’s individual character, however, was openly trending towards worst-case.

She had written anti-Semitic statements indistinguishable from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. She had disturbing associations with Islamic terror-tied groups. Sources within the Minneapolis Somali community presented evidence, including a video, of the “East Africa Team” members of Ilhan Omar’s campaign openly threatening local Somalis who may have released negative information about her.

Then came the harder evidence of corruption: Publicly available state records, viewed along with her own confirmed, time-stamped social media posts, suggested a breathtaking spree of state and federal felonies.

The social media posts, visible to anyone who cared to investigate, were rapidly being deleted from Omar’s confirmed accounts.

Best-case image, worst-case character: Would legacy outlets publish the facts, then chase more? While self-righteously condemning Trump’s “fake news” jab, would editorial decision-makers see an illusory greater good in faking it?

Reporters Preya Samsundar of AlphaNewsMN, Scott Johnson of Powerline, myself, and virtually no one else attempted to sway the most influential media decision on Omar: that of Minnesota’s largest outlet, the Star Tribune. In addition to our many published articles, the Star Tribune received calls and emails from us offering to privately share additional leads we had gathered.

Virtually nothing came of it.

In the first hours after Omar was elected to Congress in November 2018, the media -- literally, the media in its entirety -- made a similar choice:

On June 6, 2019, the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board released the results of a several-months investigation of Omar. (The investigation had been opened primarily through the efforts of Minn. State Rep. Steve Drazkowski (R-21B). Few other elected officials dared even to speak on record about Ilhan’s apparent finance violations.) The Board’s findings included a presumably career-ending admission for Omar: For at least two years, 2014 and 2015, she jointly filed her income taxes with a man who was not her husband.

There is no box to check for “unmarried filing jointly.” Joint filers are either legally married or potential tax felons. Further, Ilhan Omar was legally married to anotherman at that time -- and was in fact married to that second man from 2009-2017.

What phenomenal headline material!

Which the Star Tribune did not use. In fact, the paper chose to not even report that the likely tax fraud shock was in the Board’s findings. But the paper did include a quote from Omar -- “I’m glad this process is complete” -- and left it unchallenged.

Quickly shamed on social media, Star Tribune published a do-over the following day which did include the joint-filing discovery.

Two weeks later, on June 22, the Star Tribune finally -- after three years of prodding -- mentioned the disturbing, overwhelming fact pattern pointing to Ilhan Omar having been on an eight-year felony spree.
...

There is more.

The evidence has been ignored by the media for years because they want her to succeed.  She has benefited from the "people of color" Democrat privilege.  It is a good example of just how corrupt the mainstream media has become when it comes to Democrat corruption, particularly if it is by a "woman of color."

Omar is not the Congresswoman's real name.  She entered the US pretending to be part of another family by that name.

...
That is not her family. The Omar family is a second, unrelated family which was being granted asylum by the United States. The Omars allowed Ilhan, her genetic sister Sahra, and her genetic father Nur Said to use false names to apply for asylum as members of the Omar family.
...
Her father’s name before applying for asylum was Nur Said Elmi Mohamed. Her sister Sahra Noor’s name before applying for asylum was Sahra Nur Said Elmi. Her three siblings who were granted asylum by the United Kingdom are Leila Nur Said Elmi, Mohamed Nur Said Elmi, and Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

Ilhan and Ahmed married in 2009, presumably to benefit in some way from a fraudulent marriage. They did not divorce until 2017.
...

There is much more about her alleged criminal activity gleaned from the Somali community where she was elected at the link above the quoted material about her family.

If the brother/husband was already a British citizen the two probably would not be eligible for refugee status.