The first two Muslim women elected to the U.S. Congress, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, have shown themselves to be openly anti-Semitic and are friendly with Hamas-linked CAIR. Now they have achieved another first: they are the first Representatives to sign a pledge to impeach Trump.
The pledge was organized by a group calling itself By the People, “which bills itself a grassroots group that ‘came together because we saw that millions of Americans want the Trump Administration removed from office.’” This divisive group refuses to accept the fact that Donald Trump was elected by the people – the real grassroots of America who are fed up watching free countries become as strife-ridden as Islamic countries. The Palestinian Tlaib has brought the Palestinian jihad cry “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” to Congress, with the Somali Omar’s full support. Tlaib (supported by CAIR) endorses a one-state solution, which would obliterate the Jewish state. Omar referred to Israel as an “apartheid regime” and helps raise money for CAIR; she is solidly endorsed by Louis Farrakhan, who rails against the “wicked Jews” responsible for “anti-black racism, slavery, colonialism and dehumanization” among other ills.
It is no surprise, then, that these hateful Representatives would want to remove President Trump.
“Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib First to Sign Pledge to Impeach Trump,” by Joshua Caplan, Breitbart, February 26, 2019:
Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) are the first members of Congress to sign on to a pledge launched by a progressive advocacy organization to impeach President Donald Trump.
ABC News producer Ben Siegel on Tuesday morning reported that the freshman congresswomen were first to back the pledge, which was organized by “By the People,” which bills itself a grassroots group that “came together because we saw that millions of Americans want the Trump Administration removed from office.”
“We are committed to ending this administration and creating a country that lives up to its founding ideals,” the group’s About Us section reads.
Tlaib made national headlines for remarks she made at a reception organized by progressive advocacy group MoveOn.org hours after being sworn in as a member of Congress, in which she vowed to remove President Trump from office, stating: “[W]e’re going to go in there and we’re going to impeach the motherfucker.”
Several top Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), criticized Tlaib’s coarse language but stopped short of bringing another sort of punishment against the Michigan Democrat.
Addressing the Michigan Veterans Foundation days after the incident, Tlaib refused to apologize for her profanity-laden pledge to impeach, instead expressing regret that the remark became a political “distraction.”
“I understand I am a member of Congress. And I don’t want anything that I do or say to distract us. That is the only thing I apologize for, is that it was a distraction,” she said. “We have a course that we have to stick to, and nothing I say should distract us from that. The shutdown has to be at the forefront, that’s what I am here for, to shift to. This is so much more important.”….
Renate says
Those two should be run right out of the country for good.
mortimer says
Anyone who voted for these two jihadists is extremely foolish. Will these two be re-elected?
Terry Gain says
Obama was.
June 4, 2009 in Cairo: “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance”
Manuel 2 Pelologus says
Those who voted for those 2 mulismas and for AOC are the ones who hate this country. Those are the ones who betrayed our nation. To put such full of hatred women in the US Congress tells us what kind of people we have here.
Giacomo Latta says
More importantly, if these two are voted out of office, will they leave?
Violeta says
Amen!
Terry Gain says
Renate
I understand your sentiments. They are despicable supremacists but they are entitled to the benefit of American law. Any attempt to deprive them of that benefit will be counterproductive.
somehistory says
Terry Gain,
American Law says they should both go on trial for fraud…election,, and in the case of omar, immigration, school loans fraud and for committing incest and bigamy.
Both are being assisted by cair…the “u-nindicted”…but should be indicted…funders of terrorism.
So many crimes between the two…so little being done to see that they get the full “benefit” of American Law.
Terry Gain says
Non lawyers often don’t understand the limitations of law. What frauds did they commit?
I’ve seen claims that Omar committed Immigration fraud by marrying her brother, but these claims seem untrue. She was born in 1981, immigrated in 1995 and became a U.S citizen in 2000. She married in 2009 and 2017. So how did she commit immigration fraud?
If she committed bigamy, then she should be charged with that.
somehistory says
Terry Gain,
She didn’t just “marry her brother.” She did that to help him stay in the States long enough to go to a university. She lied when she said he was not her brother…lying to the authorities is also a crime. The Washington Standard has had several articles documenting the evidence…with photos she posted. She and her brother/husband attended the same U during some of the same years and she “married” him so he could be in the country legally.
He and their sisters are in the U.K.
She made statements that were untrue when asked about these facts.
She should be investigated, arrested and tried for her crimes. If found guilty, she should go to prison.
tlaib committed fraud by running for election in a district where she did not live, using her father’s address as her own. That is fraud. One does not need to commit murder to go to prison for crimes. But one who commits fraud cannot be trusted not to commit other crimes. There may be some that have not yet been uncovered. She too, needs to be investigated in-depth.
By the way, are you an American lawyer?
Have you studied American Law/
And, no I’m not a lawyer, but I have studied law…and am still studying law. I also helped my son with his pre law and law courses until he obtained his degree and passed the bar. At one time in this country, someone with all of the studying I have done could practice law.
Law does have limits. But these two women have broken enough of them to be investigated.
A_M_Swallow says
If her brother married her to go to a US university then both the university and US Immigration are likely to have records of the marriage. If they do not have a photocopy of the marriage certificate then an application form mentioning it.
If she married her brother has she broken the incest laws?
somehistory says
A_M_Swallow
The Washington Standard posted an article that showed copies of her marriage application to both her brother and the other guy with whom she has children. In that article are also documented the names of her brother and her father. As well as an explanation of how the people of Somali name their children. Photos of her “nieces”…whom her brother/husband also called his “nieces” which she posted are shown as well.
Not a lot of room for doubt that the claims of her marrying her own brother are true.
A_M_Swallow says
If her brother is living in Britain the pair may have broken British marriage laws – you are not allowed to marry your sister.
The Latinos may like her beating US immigration but being Catholic will hate the incest.
The Imams and Mullahs will not like her dancing.
Her bossing around may upset other Democrat Representatives and the press.
She is making lots of enemies.
However I suspect the FBI will get her for bribery or beating up a maid.
gravenimage says
Thank you, Somehistory.
mortimer says
Thanks, somehistory, for the Washington Standard PROOF of the lies. Omar lied on a government application which is an offense.
http://beltranbrito.com/lying-obtain-visa/
•If you are in the U.S.A., a removal proceeding will be initiated once the government learns that there are issues with how you entered the country. In the most serious cases, a legal proceeding can be initiated as well, there is the possibility that you will be sent to jail and then deported after having served your sentence.
•Likewise, all officers of the American government who work on immigration matters (Consular officers, port of entry officers, USCIS, CBP, immigration court judges, etc.) will always infer a lack of credibility in you.
•Finally, any immigration benefits that you have obtained by lying can be revoked. This can be the case of many benefits, such as the Tourist Visa, the Green Card or the Citizenship.
mortimer says
These two jihadists are revealing their bloodthirsty, true colors. Americans should take a close look at these two. They will eventually reveal their fully, intolerant agenda.
By the way, Tlaib, Sharia law is not among the ‘founding ideals’ of the US. It is illegal to establish one religion over another as Sharia law requires.
Terry Gain says
They are adherents of the same ideology as bin Laden. Their goals are the same. They differ only as to methods.
gravenimage says
True, Mortimer and Terry.
And Terry, this is what Hugh Fitzgerald calls the “Fast Jihad” (violent Jihad) and the “Slow Jihad” (stealth Jihad). As you note, they both have the same goal.
Kilfincelt says
Omar and Tlaib should be charged with treason as they are aiding and abetting the Islamic goal of destroying the U.S.Constitution and supplanting it with Sharia. In fact any Dem who stands with them should be impeached for not standing for the rule of law. Obama did far more damage to the rule of law which is the guiding principle of our Constitutional Republic than any President before him. Hillary broke the law and was allowed to get away with it. Holder and Lynch circumvented the law to do Obama’s bidding or to follow their own agenda. Even the top ranks of the FBI believed that the law did not apply to them. Trump has been trying to undo the damage done by Obama.
Walter Sieruk says
Who cares what that unfit politician and low class woman thinks or does? For by using such a foul terms as Rep.Rashida Tlaib did by calling the President “m….. f…..” had exposed what a very low class and totally unsophisticated as well as unintelligent woman she actually is. For a person with any class , sophistication and intelligence might strongly dislike someone but wouldn’t use such vulgarity of language as Tlaib did. She by speaking in that absence low class way has also thrown shame on the office her holds in the US government Could be that Tlaib may be trying to shows herself unfit for the office she now holds ?
abad says
I remember when Tlaib said that. But like Omar, neither Muslima look like professional congresspersons, they most certainly do not dress like professional congresspersons, and attention wh*re their Islam every single chance they get.
gravenimage says
I’m afraid we have to care–at least somewhat–because these thugs were elected to Congress.
mortimer says
GI, if someone voted for either of them, the first time, they were tricked and foolish, but the second time someone votes for them will be because they are imbeciles or totalitarians.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Mortimer. They both quickly revealed their ugly agenda.
Or Else! says
The whole Dem-Cohen sideshow in Washington while the President is negotiating disarmament with North Korea…which implicates China as well….shame on them.
Add the Green New Deal….and the whole party’s gone off the rails. Socialism meets Islamism. Good luck with that, Democrats. Oh, and open borders, infanticide…..EVERYTHING they’re doing is to usurp the U.S. Constitution.
A_M_Swallow says
Do the constituancies the two women represent have a recall?
Since they are naive and have a Middle Eastern background the women will almost certainly accept bribes. Their handlers may fail to disguise the bribes as campaign contributions. These bribes can be used against them.
Terry Gain says
Omar and Tlaib are not naive. Neither was Obama.
Tom says
Are there no real Americans left in the states that elected these Islamic supporters of sedition. If there are then perhaps they should get out and start their own petition to recall both of these women before they become fully entrenched in government.
Taking action early in a mandate can help to stop this from occurring again, but the more entrenched they become, the more difficult it will be to remove them and their support from government.
gravenimage says
Yes, but they were not elected statewide. Their districts are largely far Leftists and have large Muslim populations.
For a long time I had the worst representative in Congress–the egregious Barbara Lee–but this pair are much worse. I am appalled to see it.
WPM says
Presidents are elected to serve 4 years then they must run for reelection. President Trump has been in for about two years , two years of democratic witch hunting the Trump administration with no evidence of it has done anything illegal. Now we have two “fresh faces” congress women one that committed immigration fraud along with welfare fraud claiming her brother was her husband (IIhan Omar ) and one that has committed voter fraud by running to representing an area she did not live in (Rashida Tliab) both impeachable offensives calling for Trumps impeachment .The democrats would gladly follow any group or persons as long as they hold an anti Trump agenda , even if the passing of the Sharia law they hold above American law would end most freedoms we enjoy today. The democrats have no agenda other then they hate Trump ,with a whole group of misfit broken toys, groups of social misfits, communist ,one world Soros back idiots to run against Trump in 2020 ,they will some cannibalize themselves on the democratic convention soon enough. You cannot impeach a sitting president because he “hurts your feeling” or is rude , does not follow your political agenda .A sitting president is allow to enforce immigration laws on the books ,pass new laws ,speak his mind and opinion even if it hurts your feeling and goes against your agenda. After 4 years if you can bring your own choice to bring someone to run on a democratic ticket to run against him ,and have an election to peaceable change leadership of the country. Just because you hate Trump ,or think he is a terrible person ,a terrible leader , is no reason to remove him before his term is up .
Terry Gain says
WPM
Omar came to the United States when she was 14 and became a U.S. citizen In 2000 when she would have been 18 or 19 if born in 1981 ( although this Wiki article says she was 17). She did not marry until 2009 when she was 27 or 28.
Why do you say she committed Immigration Fraud? This is from wiki
……..
In 1995, Omar and her family’s application to be resettled as refugees in the U.S. was approved, and they initially settled in Arlington, Virginia.[9][12] In 1995, they moved to Minneapolis, where she learned English. Her father worked initially as a taxi driver, later as a postal office worker.[9] Her father and grandfather emphasized during her upbringing the importance of democracy, and she accompanied her grandfather to caucus meetings at age 14, serving as his interpreter.[10][13] Omar became a U.S. citizen in 2000 when she was 17 years old.
somehistory says
Because of her “marriage” to her brother, assisting him to get into the States and assisting him to stay and attend university, divorcing him after his return to the U.K.
That is the “immigration fraud.”
Terry Gain says
The facts are murky.
https://cis.org/North/SomaliaBorn-Candidate-Congress-Accused-ImmigrationMarriage-Fraud
WPM says
That is the point not that she immigrated here illegally but she lied about her brother claiming that he was her husband to fast track him here .If the facts are murky why does not a “journalist” ask her so she can clear it up .If you filed your income tax returns and something was “murky ” on them you would be ask by the authorities to explain them. Two years looking for Russians under Trumps bed or his closet based on very very murky” evidence .If you are a certain color or religion no one will question your past murkiness .
gravenimage says
Agreed, Somehistory and WPM.
dan christensen says
The hunt for a criminal president Trump is a wild-goose chase.
The Trumpophobians did not find the smallest scent after 2 years of prying.
It is very likely that their effort turns on themselves, when after 4 years of incessant persecution, they have no result to show.
The voters get frustrated that democratic politicians are so sensitive. After 4 years of intense manipulation and hate speech against one indvidual, the voters get fed up and rightly believe that democratic politicians in general are psycho-infantile morons.
gravenimage says
And this insanity started at the very beginning.
In the January 2017 issue of New York Magazine–which came out *before Trump had even taken the oath of office*–the cover article called for his impeachment.
WPM says
correction
They will soon cannibalize themselves at the democratic convention soon enough. Not “they will some cannibalize themselves on the democratic convention soon enough ” I meant to say
brane pilot says
People who loathe and despise the USA are brought here as ‘refugees’ at taxpayer expense. Lots of them.
They raise lots of children and teach them to loathe and despise the USA.
Their children get elected to congress by the immigrant communities they come from who loathe and despise the USA.
What is wrong with this picture?
Wellington says
Any Muslim in Congress is an insult to the Constitution, called by four-time Prime Minister of the UK, William Gladstone, the greatest document ever created by man. Particularly offensive is that no devout Muslim can accept the First and Fourteenth Amendments which, respectively, guarantee liberty and equality under the law, two things that Islam for 1400 years has been an inveterate enemy of. Might as well have a Neo-Nazi in Congress as have a Muslim there. And now there are two. This is repulsive.
Terry Gain says
Wellington
And yet you insist that Islam is a religion according to America law. So how can someone be barred from serving merely because they practice their religion? That is clearly contrary to the First Amendment.
Having it both ways is a losing proposition.
Niemoller says
That’s not exactly true. Locke, the guy who set the intellectual foundations for freedom of religion, said that freedom for religions that themselves had no respect or tolerance for other religions in a civil society, cannot be tolerated as a matter of course. To pretend it is possible otherwise is absurd. Those guys back then thought of everything. They were no fools, they didn’t fall for a naked ruse like permitting islamist sharia tyranny to set up shop in the middle of an intelligently tolerant nation based on liberty.
Terry Gain says
So I agree with Locke. Tolerance for the intolerable is intolerable.
Terry Gain says
Permit me to rephrase that.
Tolerance for the intolerant is intolerable.
Wellington says
Terry: It’s not just a matter of my contending that Islam is a religion. Robert Spencer has said this too and virtually without exception every judge in America, lawyers, law professors, et al. would be on my side, not yours. You have no one I know of of authority or substance or influence on your side.
Moreover, I don’t want to disallow a Muslim from serving in Congress anymore than I want to ban a KKK member from doing so (Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia actually at one time did belong to the KKK), a Neo-Nazi, a Marxist or loony-tune socialists like Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. But I would hope that the body politic of America would be savvy enough not to elect such people. Trouble is we’re dumbing down as so many other Western nations are and the future thus looks problematical. But my path to dealing with any nefarious ideology, whether a religion or not, is to accurately describe it and trust in the body politic to grasp what is iniquitous and proceed accordingly respecting whom they vote for.
Finally, and to reiterate, you implied in your 2:22 P.M. post above that I want to bar Muslims from serving in Congress. Nowhere in my 1:25 P.M. post above did I assert this. I’m repulsed that these two Muslimas are in Congress but I don’t want to ban them from being elected to that legislative body. Trust in the First Amendment, Terry, the body politic and focus on the iniquity of Islam and not its status. Besides, in a recent poll as published by two left-wing media outlets, the Washington Post and the Huffington Post, 30% of Democrats, 44% of Independents and 76% of Republicans have a negative view of Islam. That adds up to a lot people who are getting Islam down correctly. Even higher percentages are necessary and I hope that occurs. Better.
Niemoller says
Islam may technically be a “religion” per se, but its ability to practice its intolerant doctrine is not something we have to accept or allow under the 1st Amendment, as I pointed out that John Locke had already described in this situation.
Wellington says
Niemoller: To be specific, belief is sacrosanct per the First Amendment, though action is not. When you use the word “practice,” this could incorporate both belief and action and thus is a vague word, not a very useful word. For legal purposes it is imperative you be more precise.
Terry Gain says
Wellington
Robert has enough to contend with without taking on that issue. Accepting that Islam is a religion rather than a totalitarian conquest ideology was a major dumbing down of the American electorate.
Terry Gain says
Besides, in a recent poll as published by two left-wing media outlets, the Washington Post and the Huffington Post, 30% of Democrats, 44% of Independents and 76% of Republicans have a negative view of Islam.
……….
So am I supposed to be optimistic because only 70% of Democrats, 56% of Independents and 24% of Republicans have a positive opinion of the “religion” of Islam. Good grief.
Wellington says
Uh, Terry, Robert Spencer has ALREADY taken on THAT issue. He is on record saying that he most definitely thinks Islam is a religion. You’re way behind here.
On the second matter, I see the glass half full, you see it half empty. Hmmm. Moreover, you keep telling me my approach, which is also Spencer’s approach, i.e., acknowledging Islam is a religion but pointing out its many troubling and nefarious aspects, is not working. But how well is your approach working, Terry? Who have you lined up of authority who backs you and your (quite frankly, tedious and useless) approach of going on and on and on about how Islam is not a religion? Yeah, name ’em.
gravenimage says
People like Robert Spencer and Winston Churchill are not ‘dumb’ for considering Islam to be a religion–albeit an evil religion.
As Wellington notes, belief is one thing, and action is another. People have the right to believe whatever they want, not matter how vile–and this does not just include abhorrent religious beliefs, but also repulsive political views, including those of the Nazis, Communists, and Ku Klux Klan.
But they do *not* have the right to act on all of them. Hating Jews and Black people is disgusting but legal; assaulting them or worse is not.
Muslims have the right to practice their creed to the extent of things like praying (even if that prayer calls for the smiting of Infidels), but it does *not* extend to their being able to oppress unbelievers or stone women to death.
David Longfellow says
Traitors gonna trait.
somehistory says
If a farmer sows corn kernels, waters and hoes the ground, in a few months, he will reap corn.
If a farmer sows wheat, waters and cultivates the ground, he will reap wheat.
These two moslim creeps…calling for the impeachment of someone that has tried to take steps against all that they sand for….islam’s takeover of everything and everyone…are sowing evil.
These two moslim creeps…both ugly as homemade sin…are sowing trouble, watering and cultivating trouble…all for their evil ideology from satan…islam.
These two moslim creeps, liars and fraudsters…will reap as they have sown. They are sowing trouble in the cause of evil. Their crops will be full and over-flowing.
They are crafty….but they are also stupid. Every criminal is stupid. Criminality reaps punishment.
Marie says
I’m more concerned with the amount of top secret information they now have access to. I’ve also heard the “islamophobe” word uttered.
somehistory says
Marie
There are several levels of security and each has its own background checks and security checks. Certain members of Congress have a greater level of security than do others, but the entire body does not have access to everything. There are different committees and each of these have their own levels of security depending on what they have to decide on.
Since they are new, it is likely that they will not have access to many things as yet, and probably nothing at the very top level of security. But whatever they have, if it gets leaked, it would be easier to trace the source of the leak since not all members would be given the same exact information. It will be hard for them, and aoc, to keep their mouths shut and not give out secrets.
James says
One of these witches represents a district where I once lived, before it became a Muslim quarter. I wish the Dems had never got the idea of settling such people in my city. If they love jihad so much, they should have been sent to a Muslim country where they would meet with the approval of most people. They ought to be removed from office, as they deserve it more than Trump does. Just for the ties to radical groups and their slander of Israel disqualify them in my eyes at least.
James says
They should not be given any top secret information. They do not represent their country or their city, they represent Somalia, Isis, jihad, anti-Semitism, and everything evil under the sun.
Terry Gain says
Once elected they have the same rights as all members. So people who don’t want them to have access to the same information as all members of Congress need to ensure they aren’t elected. The only way to do that is to control immigration.
A_M_Swallow says
The US President and Vice President are not security vetted but I believe everyone else given access to SECRET information is. The Republicans should ensure the vetters have a list of her suspicious activities.
somehistory says
A_M_Swallow
When a person is checked out and given a security clearance of some importance, everyone they have close to them after that is also checked out…who they are, what they’ve done, gone to school, family, etc.
The higher the clearance, the more they are supposed to check.
And yes, those people doing the background checks should have all of the facts upfront so they are aware of any thing that has already been discovered and anything looking like it needs to be seriously looked at for threats.
A_M_Swallow says
The checking is also done at various levels. An empty FBI file plus knows important people, like Members of the House of Representatives, will trigger an over worked jobs worth to just rubber stamp the application form and move onto the next person. Where as an FBI file that says no convictions (yet) but this one is trouble (wants to overthrow democracy through violence) will probably trigger a more though investigation.
somehistory says
A_M_Swallow
I was “checked” once because someone I met and became close to had a high clearance. I was not aware of it at the time, finding out later when the person I knew informed me. But, they checked absolutely everything about me. And that was not for the highest clearance, and not for someone who would be given information about all the inside workings of the government. Just a specific area of clearance, but important.
A lot of it depends on whose doing the checking, how they see their job, and like you say, if they are “busy” and rely on others to have done their job right.
If a person was thoroughly checked when they began campaigning for a position in government, and was not allowed to lie to the public….as they are not supposed to lie to a Senate committee…it would be much more difficult for them to get into a position to know things they shouldn’t due to their evil goals.
A_M_Swallow says
The Democratic and Republican Parties could sponsor the vetting of their candidates for the Senate, Presidency and House of Representatives. Once elected their office staff also need vetting, however spying by Muslim computing support people is a different story.
gravenimage says
Anti-Semitic, Hamas-linked CAIR-supporting Muslim Reps. Tlaib and Omar first to sign pledge to impeach Trump
……………..
No surprise there. The President–inconsistent as he has sometimes been–still has tried to defend us against Jihad terror more than any other president in the modern age.
del says
I heard Tlaib refer to herself as a “person of color” a couple of times in yesterdays rancorous exchange with Rep. Meadows (in order to justify her obnoxiousness). Is it the general consensus in the US nowadays that Arab-Americans are that? Is it the general consensus among Democrats? Among African-Americans? What is the hipster jargon for appropriating culture/identity from another, particularly a protected minority, group?
A_M_Swallow says
As an Arab she is brown skinned so definitely a person of color.
del says
Are (sometimes olive-skinned) Italians, “persons of color”?
gravenimage says
Yes–even though many Arabs are as light-skinned as any Caucasian.
Or Else! says
“Person of color” is weaponized victimhood buzz phrase to use against whites–which is also a colour. Do they know how Muhammad regarded and treated “black” people? Do they know about the Muslim slave trade in Africa? Not only that….how about how European white females were prized sex slaves for centuries!!!!!! Identity politics is all about one-sided revenge and power….certainly not truth or intellect.
gravenimage says
Spot on.
brane pilot says
When the only thing immigrants bring to their new country is hate, who needs immigration.
Seriously.
WPM says
Not all immigrants just supremist Islamic immigrants ,the United States years ago vetted people ,who could immigrate to America .communist ,Nazis ,and anarchist would not be permitted to have green cards, work visas or even enter the country they would be deported at the border .One of the chief reasons for a secure borders and enforcement of immigration laws. Citizens of a country have obey the country,s laws ,non-citizens should not get a pass on which laws they should have to follow when entering a country they are not a citizen of .