Omar Faces Ethics Outcry Over Payments To Husband After Decrying Those Who Profit Under Our “System Of Oppression”

440px-Ilhan_Omar,_official_portrait,_116th_CongressRep. Iihan Omar has been much in the news for her extreme positions on defunding police departments and yesterday calling for the dismantling of not just the American economy but the political system.  In declaring her support for sweeping legislation yesterday, Omar railed against the American economic and political systems as a “system of oppression” and insisted that we cannot allow people to “prioritize profit without considering who is profiting.” That question however is now being raised in growing ethical concerns over Omar giving her husband’s company a massive amount of her campaign funds.  This has been an issue that I have written about for over two decades as a legal but corrupt practice. The two stories show once again that the only defining element in Washington greater than irony is hypocrisy in both of our political parties. Update: Omar may have given as much as one million dollars to her husband’s company.

The ethical charges are being voiced by figures like George Bush’s ethic adviser Richard Painter who has been one of the most vocal critics of President Donald Trump. Indeed, Painter previously criticized Omar after she declared that she believes former Vice President Joe Biden is a rapist who is continuing to lie about raping a Senate staffer. However, she is still supporting and advising Biden in his presidential election.  Painter objected that Omar would publicly admit that she believed Biden raped his staffer because it could undermine his election.

Painter is now focused on what is clearly a legitimate ethical concern. He is quoted as saying payments like those of Omar “should not be allowed . . . given the amount of money that goes into these campaigns from special interests.”

Omar has previously been criticized for paying fees to Tim Mynett’s consulting firm when they were rumored to be in a romantic relationship. Mynett and Omar would later divorce their respective spouses and marry.  Omar has given Mynett a total of more than $878,000 since 2018. That includes $189,000 just weeks after the couple announced they were married, according to media reports citing data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

What should upset voters the most is that (so long as the payment reflect a very generous standard of market rates) this is all perfect legal under the laws designed by politicians for themselves.

I have long been a critic of such use of campaign funds for family members, but both parties have long engaged in the practice.  I have been a vocal critic of such nepotism by members of Congress as well as nepotism in the Trump Administration.  The Trump campaign also pays the President’s family members or “significant others” ample salaries.

For decades I have railed against laws designed carefully to give the appearance of ethics while intentionally creating loopholes for politicians to enrich their families.  The recent controversy over Hunter Biden is another example of one of those avenues for corruption in the form of influence peddling (contracts that both leading Democrats and the media have bizarrely defended).  It is also lawful but an obvious corrupt practice. When faced with corrupt but legal practices by members of their own party, many continue to espouse the “if it is legal it is alright” claim.  It is not all right.  It exists because these politicians can count on their parties to deflect criticism or insist that there is nothing to see here. The anti-nepotism statute is an example of this fraud played on the American people by both parties.  Congress carefully excluded campaign work to allow members to pour campaign money into the pocket of their own spouses and children.

Again, it is important to note that this type of payment to spouses continues in both parties.  As someone who have objected to this loophole for over twenty years, I am astonished that Congress has been able to get away with this practice for so long. Voters continue to be chumps who allow both parties to play them on blue state/red state politics.  When faced with ethical challenges, these politicians just ratchet up rhetoric against the other side.  When it comes to ethics, politicians know that the outrage lasts only until the next short news cycle and political shiny object.

If you really want to stop politicians from “prioritiz[ing] profit without considering who is profiting,” you can start with the families of people like Rep. Omar.

158 thoughts on “Omar Faces Ethics Outcry Over Payments To Husband After Decrying Those Who Profit Under Our “System Of Oppression””

    1. Her district includes the entire city of Minneapolis. It is hard to imagine the dunderheads that must live in that city to elect Omar and the mayor. And, of course, the MN Attorney General is from that district as well. Saint Paul used to be part of the Twin Cities but I suspect there will be a Black Lives Matter movement to rename it because Saint Paul did admonish slaves to obey their masters. Might I suggest that they rename Saint Paul to “Pig’s Eye,” its original name.

      1. The dunderheads are radical muslims barak placed in Minn. It’s like an islamic hell where she got wlected. Coos dont even go in there

        1. Nik, the Somalis were being imported into Minnesota by “social relief agencies” ie the churches, as refugees, long before Obama was president

          Yes, the same “churches” that don’t even bother to hold Mass and services anymore because of a virus.

          The pathetic lack of leadership by “churches” is half the problem of what’s gone wrong in America the past 70 years. They are a total bust now, one and all.

  1. “prioritize profit without considering who is profiting.” Well, I will tell her sorry ass that I am one of those who is profiting from Corporate profits. That is so I don’t have to live off the government when I get older. She is such a stupid dirtbag. As are the “Great Unwashed” of Minnesota who elected her to office. They got gut punched!

  2. How did this BITC* end up in the US? And with and with an American Citizenship??? She should be so damn lucky to be here instead of in her home country. Actually, stripping her US Citizenship and sending her back to her country of origin is a mighty FINE IDEA. WHO the F does she think she is?

    1. It’s crazy. Refugees are properly cared for in camps proximate to their home countries with a view to their eventual repatriation. We might work to improve public health in those camps, but we don’t need to be resettling people here. Anyone aspiring to settle in the United States should have to pass a written and oral examination in English, pass a physical, and pass a background check, then wait in a global queue for their entry visa. Those admitted from places like Somalia should be limited to families with children and older married couples. Among settlers in the US, naturalization should only be offered to people who’ve been lawful and palpable residents for the majority of their natural lives.

  3. Omar is a seditionist. She should be censured by the US House of Representatives. If she is not then the House is filled with Seditionists too.

    And we know that they are and their chief is named Pelosi.

    Omar is calling for revolution or civil war. Call it what you like. Usually we call it a revolution when it succeeds, a coup when it fails, and a civil war when it grinds on for a long time.

    Whatever you want to call it, just refer to her own words for the proof.

    Not only should she be censured, and ejected, like they did to the American patriot James Trafficante, for a trifle; but
    She should be arrested, given a due process trial, and punished to the maximum extent of the law.

    For now however she is a convenient lightening rod of trouble. So tell all your friends: the Democrats want a civil war. This is reality.

  4. Sadly, no matter how much Democrat corruption is uncovered, the BEST one can hope for is some long, expensive, FAKE investigation. They’ll drizzle out a few damning facts, then they’ll tell us to await the very slowly turning wheels of Justice…which never roll by. Omar will suffer no consequences for any of her crimes or corruption. The immigration fraud, the incestual fraud marriage, the finance crimes…we’ll all get to watch in frustration as she is (astonishingly) re-elected to bleed us like a vampire until she’s sated…then she’ll ride into the sunset laughing at America for allowing a such a hateful, overt enemy to the country and agent provocateur to have infiltrated our government and rot us from within.

  5. This is one of JTs worst posts. Where is the story? Even you admit she has done nothing illegal, and what she does is common among politicians, yet somehow her unrelated call to end systematic oppression puts her into a different category?

    1. Yeah, MollyG, when you pop nearly a million to your hubby it kinda makes the whole “oppression” thingy seem kinda hypocritical at the least. It would be as if Trump tweeted angrily about someone calling him a bad name on Twitter.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Squeeky- The Bidens made many many millions for Hunter, so MollyG raises a fair point about Omar being a victim of systemic oppression. It is only fair that the Bidens redistribute some of their loot to communities under served by public corruption.

          1. @delmaracer – Do you have an ax to grind against Omar, or are you in bed with the Bidens? Omar is a victim of systemic oppression and deserves her fair share of the corruption loot. The Bidens have ridden their privilege to take more than they deserve. I just think some of it should be redistributed to Omar. It’s basic fairness. It’s beyond me how anyone could be opposed to that.

    2. If she wants to end “systemic oppression,” Omar should go go back to Somalia. There’s plenty of “systemic oppression” for her to work on there.

    3. It’s to low key disparage Democrats. JT is pretty partisan although he’ll be the first to deny it. Conservatives are generally that way.

      Read through the comments section. The crowd here is bent toward the Newsmax/OANN types.

      1. Nice attempt at a wrist slap. “Pretty partisan”? Not exactly… how about we say “He calls it like he sees it.” Obviously some things in her past that need to be accounted for. And the crowd here is a little more diverse than you might think.

        1. Partisan Democrats are in a continual lather at Turley because his columns do not offer reflexive denunciations of the president and because they occasionally feature stories embarrassing to Democrats. It’s not difficult to figure out what animates Turley, but it’s beyond what partisan Democrats are capable.

      2. To olaf the oaf, WHO cares what you think? First it was fox news, now it’s Newsmax and OANN. You should go back to your BLM roots.

        1. I am originally from Denmark and gained my citizenship in the 1990s. We are raised to be sensible and critical thinkers. Although I do believe that “black lives matter”, I am not some left wing activist. I consider myself to be a centrist. Yes, I am not a native born American, I am naturalized. Does that make me any less American than George?

          (unless he’s a Russian troll)

  6. I thought the FBI was investigating her and the brother she married for deportation and return to her village?

  7. She’s a cretin for sure, but she hardly stands alone for enriching herself via her family.

    If we looked at the family wealth of our humble elected representatives before and after their time in ‘service’, it would be just as shocking.

    Maxine Waters, a career politician, has a net worth estimated to be several million dollars.

    Nancy Pelosi, a career politician, has a net worth in the $30 to $60 range.

    I’m sure you could find the same on the right. I randomly picked Lindsay Graham. He had a 13 year legal career before entering politics. His net worth is estimated to be around $5M, and it’s very doubtful that his law career was that lucrative.

    Whether this is legal or not, these people are corrupt. They know it and they make the rules and we look the other way because we want our corrupt SOBs to beat theirs.

    1. Pelosi’s husband is a real estate developer, as is Dianne Feinstein’s. I imagine their careers had a certain symbiosis, but do not know the mechanics of it. I’m not sure where you got that estimate of Lindsay Graham’s net worth. Open Secrets says his worth is just shy of $1 million dollars (https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/net-worth?cid=N00009975). That’s credible for a bachelor earning professional class salaries over a period of 35 years.

      1. There are a number of places to get estimated net worth of famous people. I can’t vouch for the accuracy. Not sure where I got the one for Graham.

        1. His retirement income would be derived from the rent, interest and dividends of that wad, his Social Security and Medicare benefits, and his federal pensions. Not sure he was vested for his military service, but he’s been accumulating pension rights as a member of Congress for 25 years. He’s eligible for Medicare benefits this year, full Social Security next year. If I’m not mistaken, federal employees have l/t care insurance, too.

          1. Thisisabusurd, fed employees don’t get l/t insurance unless they pay for it. And historically, it’s been a super bad deal, with the insurer already reneging and increasing premiums at least a couple times. Many fed employees pass on the fed’s version of l/t care insurance because it’s such a poor deal.

    2. Lorenzo, I agree with you, but 2 things.

      – $1 million is not what it used to be, and an even modest house in LA probably gets you there.
      – It’s difficult to write rules that don’t end up with only already rich people in Congress. Most logically, we would start by paying them at least what mid-level management at better corporations pay and provide outside of that enough for renting a 2nd home in DC.. Every time pay raises come up in Congress, some yahoos demagogue it. “You get what you pay for” is a pretty true statement most of the time, and if somebody else is paying them, that’s probably who they are working for.

        1. Pelosi was. Graham and Waters are not convincing, but maybe more data. I don’t say you are wrong, but don’t forget speaking fees are quick and easy bucks for a lot of them, and what should we do about it? I made a proposal.

          1. Pelosi married her husband in 73 and I don’t know if he was rich then, but he didn’t start his current company in 1983, by which time Nancy Pelosi was well in to her political career. It appears they made the majority of their money with that company. Lucky? Perhaps.

            1. Her gather was the mayor of Baltimore, so you could say her political career began then – except it didn’t. She was an actual housewife for a significant period

      1. The salaries for Congresspeople should be very high. All executive grades need to be high too. there is no downside to paying the Congress-people more.
        We need to make the risk-reward calculation for corruption a bad proposition and they more you pay them the better the likely outcomes in general.

        The prohibition of thinly concealed corruption in the form of no show jobs like hunter biden had making many times more for a paltry Ukrainian gas company than he would have made as a director for a major company like Exxon– where directors actually have qualifications and responsibilities– that is what needs a closer look and possible legal reform

        1. +1 on congressional salaries.

          How are you going to keep a private citizen from trading on his name with a foreign company. Impossible and none of our business unless you can tie something else to it. You think Peyton Manning shouldn’t be able to sell his name to Cheeto-Lay?

        2. I get the point but not sure it’s the biggest problem. IMO, the much bigger problem is all the money in politics, both via self enriching and the need to raise campaign funds. And I think the latter begets the former. That leads us back to the problem of campaign finance reform.

    3. LV, you are WAY off base. You doubt Graham’s law career was Graham’s source of money? You forgot that he retired from the Military as a Judge. What did you graduate from? Anything?

  8. Omar has drawn multiple primary challengers but has raised far more money, undoubtedly contributions from out of district cretins, a practice I’d favor visiting in new campaign financing reform.

    1. a practice I’d favor visiting in new campaign financing reform.

      You mean a new incumbent protection law.

      1. Incumbents do especially well drawing in out of district contributions and with the Citizen’s United ruling, corporate and union contributions..

          1. Citizen’s United does not only unleash police unions, which are small potatoes. As residents of the district, police officers should be able to support their candidate without being overwhelmed by mail in checks from across the continent.

          2. Darren, I’m going to ask this be deleted and the IP address sanctioned. One thing that will ruin the forum further is allowing sh!tposting like this. I assume it’s one of the resident adolescents (YNOT, Fishwings), but wouldn’t put it past Shill or Gainesville.

            1. It was me. I thought you’d get a kick out of it. The issues discussed here are fundamental, and pointed comments result. Yours, I must say, have a fair amount of name-calling. But , I read your comments, and wouldn’t bother responding to them otherwise. And I don’t dismiss them. Would have followed up with this comment regardless. But if you really want me kicked off so be it.

              1. Yours, I must say, have a fair amount of name-calling

                They don’t, but if lying helps you feel better…

  9. She’s a lying, cheating, home-wrecking hypocrite, so we’re supposed to be surprised that she also may be engaged in financial misconduct? She was born in Somalia and came here as a refugee, but hates the country that offered her refuge and opportunities unimaginable in the sh!thole that she came from. She reportedly married her own brother to assist his immigration fraud. While she was married, she engaged in adultery with an also married employee, and broke up his marriage, leaving a devastated wife and 13 y/o boy. She divorced her own husband and married the cheater, Tim Mynett, who is a white Christian. So much for her devotion to Islam. Apparently the scarf that she wears is just a fake symbol for her Somali constituents but doesn’t prevent her from doing what she wants, with whomever she wants. And then to top it off, she funneled large sums of campaign funds to her new husband’s business. Minnesota has a history of electing sketchy politicians, but she’s the worst.

  10. Nice try JT, but Omar’s and Trump’s paying campaign funds to relatives has nothing to do with Hunter Biden being paid by a Ukrainian company to be famous name window dressing, by itself a legal and standard practice by many companies.and done in broad daylight. Nothing improper otherwise has been linked to him because of that position.

    1. I agree with you bythebook. Hunter Biden’s riches came from China, and from a Uranian oligarch’s company, while Jue was VP. And, the fact that Joe Biden admitted on open video, that he had the prosecutor investigating the company (Burisma), fired in return for which aid to Ukraine was on the table as a bargaining chip, is not even close to what he is discussing with Omar. Paying relatives out of campaign funds is dirty on its face, but what Biden did is criminal, and not merely ugly.

      1. Justice, your ignorance is truly impressive. Joe did not lobby the Ukraine to fire the guy investigating Burisma.

        1. More impressive is how you stick to talking points that your handlers feed you as their paid troll.

          Is 401k included or just an inner satisfaction for sh!tting on people anonymously?

        2. @bythebook is absolutely correct on this point. Biden didn’t lobby to have the prosecutor fired. He actually had the prosecutor fired.

  11. She has a problem with bigamy, incest, all sorts of campaign violations, not including violations of her oath of office.

    1. Just this week, Somerville, Massachusetts recognized polygamy. People in polygamous relationships are now eligible for government benefits. Polygamy isn’t a problem, it’s a force for social justice. Polygamy rocks!

      1. I don’t see how a city can legalize a practice that is illegal under state and federal law. So Somerville may declare it’s a sanctuary city for men with eight wives or women with eight husbands, but they’re not going to get state or federal benefits if those “marriages” aren’t recognized by the respective sovereigns.

            1. TIN – with 8 wives I would be going out for 5 gallon cans of milk for the milk dispenser.

            1. DV – you know that eight women are going to sync up, so the PMS is going to be hell.The current and only wife used to chase me around the house trying to pick a fight when she was PMSing. At first it was baffling, then it became an intellectual curiosity, so I started charting it. After a couple of months of results I shared the results with my wife and things cooled down during that period (pun intended). Imagine that times eight?

        1. The NYT reports the Somerville ordinance requires health insurance companies to provide health care benefits to people in polygamous relationships.

          Today we think its a fringe view, but it won’t be too long until recognition of polygamous relationships becomes mainstream on the left. Social justice, after all.

          1. Polygamy would be an entirely different legal argument than that for gay marriages (equal protection) and is not on some slippery slope begun by the latter. Not in favor myself.

            1. Nope. It is on the slippery slope accelerated by so-called gay marriage. Nice try though! Just wait until man-boy relationships become legal!

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. Gay marriage is between consenting adults.

                Polygamy is a marriage between consenting adults.

                Man-boy relationships are not between consenting adults and therefore could never be legal, just as no underage relationships can have legal sexual encounters.

                If polygamy was legal in the US, I doubt it would have much appeal to most people and would only be feasible for those who could afford to maintain such a household. The problem we have with polygamy in the US is in cults where they practice it illegally and put the women who are legally unmarried on welfare. By making it illegal we have created this particular problem.

                If legalized polygamy ever did catch on in the US and the people and kids were all safe and well-cared for, I don’t see it as an issue other than I personally have no interest.

                1. Lots of behaviors between consenting adults are illegal across the states and the SC did not address that. They granted marriage rights to gay couples under equal protection.

                  1. I’m making the distinction between gay marriage and man-boy relationships that the earlier poster mentioned as a slippery slope.

                2. Yeah but—who says you have to be an adult to consent??? Because if you will look, that barrier is being eroded. For example, if some 7 year old boy thinks he may be a girl, he is treated like an adult – people start putting him in dresses and getting him prepared to whack his weenie off.

                  If a 13 year old girl becomes pregnant and wants to get an abortion over her parents objections, guess what? She gets to make that choice.

                  Sooo, how long will it be before some 11 old queer kid wants to have sex, will that “right” become protected? I think not too long.

                  Sometimes “slippery slope” arguments can fall into insane devolvements. But I think with the number of sexually weird “experts” and advocates out there, the arrow is pointed in that direction. Look at the atrocious drag queen children’ story hours at public libraries. Did you ever think you would see something like that?

                  Or this:

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w5X4aD6mo8

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

                  1. Squeeky – I have always thought that prostitution is legal under an extention of the “secret” privacy clause in the Constitution. And, for that matter, not wearing masks in public.

            2. Polygamy is an ancient social custom hallowed by Judaism, Islam, and other countless ancient religions, and was practiced in China until 1947, and even later in some non-PRC Asian jurisdictions, called in English, concubinage., The famous Macau casino tycoon Stanley Ho, who just died, actually had several living wives, which were lawful under HK & Macau law legacy rules about Qing Dynasty law.

              It is also a licit practice for who knows how many tens or hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide, who are normal human beings and not monsters.

              In the US we have had for quite some time now “serial polygamy” one spouse and then another after divorce.

              We also have flagrant adultery in the US which in some instances is problematic but mostly persists subrosa without much social concern.

              In the US we also have tacit polygamy in the form of one lawful marriage plus other de facto “wives” — i had a Muslim friend, rip, who had one lawful wive and two more besides.
              I am sure plenty of Muslims practice this here and maybe Mormons too. There is no bigamy provided that there is not more than one lawful licensed marriage.
              I also have a Chinese friend who has two wives, one in the PRC and one here, and he rotates half year in each place. Or he used to before Covid. Who knows if that one is technically bigamous or not, but, nobody cares.

              There is less “threat to society” posed by polygamy than normalized homosexual socalled “marriages” if you ask me, but what do I know. I realize that my viewpoints are considered retrograde here, and are rather more accepted in the third world on many such things now than they are in the “Enlightened” “West”

              1. The gay marriage decision was decided on equal protection. There is no equal protection argument for polygamy. Other arguments are available for those favoring – or opposing it – but it is not down the hill on a slippery slope from gay marriage.

          2. It is only a matter of time. Obergefell makes it a foregone conclusion. Turley has written about this numerous times.

                  1. How do the principles differ? It’s the exact same situation, but with a different number of players. I don’t see how you can differentiate “gender” doesn’t matter, but “number” does?

    1. There’s nothing to look at except in the imagination of partisan Democrats. If there were, Laurence Tribe wouldn’t have been hanging his hat on the emoluments clause nonsense.

      1. Seems to me Tribe hung his hat on extortion of a foreign government in order for help in a domestic election — which added up to an impeachment in the House and with all the Dem senators voting for removal, one Repub, and a key group of Repubs who granted the crime but just couldn’t bring themselves to risk their Koch & ALEC money enough to risk losing it over a removal vote.

        Silly me.

    2. I find it quite funny when an Orange Man Bad minion can’t contain their anger at the Orange Man to the point that it consumes their thoughts and comments.

      1. I find it quite funny when orange man good apologists have to grunt like a child busting one out in their diaper to continue their denial over the workings of a catastrophically awful president.

        1. Obama is gone, so we aren’t concerned with his workings anymore. But thanks for caring!

  12. Again, two crimes: improper use of campaign funds and denigrating whatever good she stands for. The substance of the message and the vehicle. Omar is increasingly dirtying her vehicle. Even the noblest of content loses when presented by a sullied vehicle. The only place this works is with Trump. He is a disgrace and an incompetent vehicle that spouts idiocy. Somehow it works.

  13. She needs to learn to be an American or go back to the Terrorist she represents. She does not Represent the voters who voted for her and should have a recall vote done by the state that elected the Anti-American.

    1. Kinda strange. A white majority district in greater Minneapolis (wherein the Somali population is about 4% of the total) elects this vicious creature and a black-majority district in Detroit elects Rashida Tlaib. I thought once we had more cross-over voting – with whites representing minority districts and vice versa – you’d have fewer clowns and sectaries in Congress because people would be voting parties and issues. Stupid me.

  14. Because being a crooked and malicious cretin is a job Americans just won’t do. Diversity is our strength.

Leave a Reply