Posted on 06/08/2019 1:16:04 PM PDT by Hojczyk
she was elected to public office in November 2016, Ilhan Omar has rarely avoided the opportunity to talk for public consumption. We happened upon an exception to the rule back in 2016 in the course of Omar’s campaign for the Minnesota legislature when we learned of Omar’s then current marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. At the time she held out Ahmed Hirsi as her husband on her campaign site and elsewhere. We found that Omar had legally married Elmi in 2009 and wondered if he was her brother. Omar remained married to him from 2009 to 2017. Although Omar has three children with Hirsi, Omar never did marry him until last year.
When I asked Omar about all this by email in August 2016, she declined to respond in substance and implied that the question reflected bigotry on my part. “There are people who do not want an East African, Muslim woman elected to office and who will follow Donald Trump’s playbook to prevent it,” her campaign told me through a criminal lawyer. “Ilhan Omar’s campaign sees your superfluous contentions as one more in a series of attempts to discredit her candidacy.”
Although she didn’t marry Hirsi until last year, Omar has held Hirsi out as her husband at all times since she became a public figure. Over what period of time did Omar and Hirsi file joint tax returns? My guess is that it runs back to 2002. We know she filed joint tax returns with Hirsi while she was still married to Elmi. In addition to the IRS issues, the questions intersect with those arising from Omar’s marriage to Elmi.
Omar and Hirsi never split. Omar’s marriage to Elmi was a sham. The illegal Omar/Hirsi joint tax returns reopen a story that Omar has to keep closed.
(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...
It’s a blog.
She’s a sham “American” too.
She and others of her ilk claim the right to accuse Donald Trump of treason, whilst claiming that no one has the right to question theirs.
You're a bore.
In honor of your stupid post, I just clicked on the link, which I hadn’t done before.
I'm really sorry to hear that.
That’s OK, you can’t help it. Doesn’t make it any less true though.
Click it a whole bunch of times, really fast.
Pretend it's porn.
Obviously you don’t have the wit to contribute anything of interest, or humor, or insight, but you feel an intense need to be noticed anyway.
So you sit around waiting for people to post something from a blog, and then you leave your “contribution,” which is a little verbal mouse-pellet of dung.
I only clicked it once, dingwad. More than that won’t count as a view.
Sure. Just once in passing.
You weren't playing with it.
“It’s a blog.”
So just, in your mind, what does that have to do with the correctness of the content? Are we to assume that you believe that blogs are not worthy of your consideration as regards their truthfulness? Do you believe in the First Amendment?
Just Checking!
One of your 10-watt replies. Ho hum.
The blog stole the material and wants to profit from that theft.
You like that?
Prove it. Prove that statement.
Disengage. This guy has only this forum to police in life. Let him have his little project.
You’re right.
HOORAY for stolen blog material!
Let’s all smooch the backsides of thieves for informing us!
YAY thieves!
Did you think a blog has a crack team of reporters?
Or maybe they just ripped off something online?
Suckers.
You like that?”
Actually, I don't give a $hit! It's enough to have another avenue to get the truth out!
Seems to me it should be up to whomever was the material was “stolen from” to initiate any action that would be appropriate don't you think?
So stealing is fine so long as it wasn't stolen from you.
You'll probably go to hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.