Hillary's Jihadist Donors

IBD ^ | November 9, 2007

[Kaslin]

Election 2008: Looks like Hillary Clinton's vetting of campaign donations still needs work. FEC records show she's taken cash from Islamists so tainted that past Democrat candidates have returned their money.

---

Some of the donors, in fact, are under active federal investigation for supporting terrorism, money laundering and tax fraud. After the press reported their alleged terror ties in past elections, Democrat Reps. Jim Moran of Virginia and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia had to refund their donations, making national news.

But that hasn't stopped Hillary from pocketing their money. So much for her promise to fly-speck donations for criminal ties following her fund-raising scandal with fugitive donor Norman Hsu.

In the past several months, the Democrat front-runner has received at least $2,000 from M. Yaqub Mirza, M. Omar Ashraf and Omar Barzinji, records show. Federal agents raided the Virginia homes and offices of the Muslim donors after 9/11, as part of a counterterrorism investigation targeting the so-called Safa group, a Saudi-backed conglomerate of Muslim businesses and charities.

None of the men has been charged with crimes. But their connections are worrisome enough that even Islamist-sympathizing lawmakers such as Moran and McKinney felt compelled to give back their gifts.

Mirza is said to act on behalf of Saudi millionaire Yassin al-Qadi, who's been designated an al-Qaida financier by the U.S. government, according to WorldNetDaily, which broke the story about the donations.

It wouldn't be the first time Saudi money has found its way to Clinton coffers. In fact, the "Royal Saudi Family" is listed as one of the top donors bankrolling Bill Clinton's presidential library in Little Rock.

[CZB]

I think this problem is much worse than a few contributions from minor Islamist operatives here. I believe the highly scrutinized Pelosi trip to Syria was likely a greasing of the contributions skid. Maybe she brought a bag of Arab cash for the DNC right back home with her earlier this year, who knows. The Syrians were believed to be planning to back Howard Dean with about $300,000 in 2004, had he got the nomination. But the Islamists are only part of the problem. The Chinese, Soros, Moveon—they all understand that the American presidency can be bought and paid for. As long as they don’t figure out what the corporations already understand, that the Repubs can be bought as easily as the Dems...

[VOA]

bump

[casino66]

It has been no secret who the terrorists want to win the election. How much slimier can the Clintons get? We will probably never know.

[sure_fine]

ping

[tcrlaf]

AT what point does the MSM start calling these Democrats on the HUGE amounts of overseas cash that is trying to buy our elections???

Better yet, at what point do the FEDERAL PROSECUTORS start doing something about it?

[gov_bean_ counter]

But I didn’t know until this day, that it was Barzinji all along.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Your #2. IMO there was a reason the Dems wanted the captured Iraqi documents taken off the internet once it was discovered what a meticulous record keeper Saddam was. I am convinced those documents contain the names of Saddam’s enablers in the US to include the laundered campaign funds of which you speak to; to CARE for example.

[CZB]

“...Your #2. IMO there was a reason the Dems wanted the captured Iraqi documents taken off the internet once it was discovered what a meticulous record keeper Saddam was. I am convinced those documents contain the names of Saddam’s enablers in the US to include the laundered campaign funds of which you speak to; to CARE for example....”

It might also explain why the Dems are opposed to the wiretapping of overseas communications. I believe the Syrian plan to back Dean was first picked up via electronic monitoring of meetings in Damascus in 2003 and 2004. If wiretapping of calls between Damascus and Washington followed, I wouldn’t be surprised.

[CRBDeuce]

“the American presidency “
Since you’re elaborating on the problem:
“the new American Socialist Bureaucracy”
is what you’re referring to! While the American President is a minor thorn in the invading illegals side, our bloated Socialist Bureacracy is ripe for invaders to infiltrate and corrupt.

[WesternPacific]

I would hope the question from the MSM’s sudo-investigative reporters would be “Why Islamic terrorist support Hillary Clinton? I think this would be a very interesting research topic for a thesis.

[CZB]

“the American presidency “
Since you’re elaborating on the problem:
“the new American Socialist Bureaucracy”
is what you’re referring to! While the American President is a minor thorn in the invading illegals side, our bloated Socialist Bureacracy is ripe for invaders to infiltrate and corrupt....CRBDeuce

No doubt, the bureaucracy will be as compromised as the political entities that control it. It’s often said in Washington that “people are policy.” So, if you buy the people you own the policy.

There’s no major democratic bureaucracy that hasn’t been penetrated via its own political process at one time or another. What’s particularly bad now is that so many of America’s enemies have SO much cash. The Soviets never had the money to rival the Arabs, and even the Chinese or Hugo Chavez are better suited to make the payoffs. Also, the networks for channeling money into our system are far more sophisticated than the old dead drop of KGB lore. Nowadays, a Chavez can fund a “chair” at a university here and in due course create a think tank and a short list for a juicy cabinet position. Would anyone be surprised if a Chinese company tried to buy its way into our media? Or, you can just invite the Speaker of the House over for a chat and drop a bag of cash down for one of her lackeys to take home.

Th best defense against this would be to take the money out of the electoral political process altogether. But the last time that was tried... Well, there’s no point in rehashing the McCain-Feingold flop, is there?