My husband dumped me for Ilhan Omar, DC mom says in divorce filing

[Anonymous]

Umm. Mark Sandord lost his governorship but was subsequently elected to the House, where he currently serves, and is running against Trump.

No. He was elected to the House after the affair, but he lost re-election in 2018. He lost the primary--likley due to his opposition to Trump. Although, the victor in the primary lost to a Dem.

[Anonymous]

It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

Maybe....
Necessarily...
What about her filing taxes with one husband while being married to another? And admitting she didn’t amend them?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

Maybe....
Necessarily...
What about her filing taxes with one husband while being married to another? And admitting she didn’t amend them?

Is there any reason why you prefer an assumption of guilt over an assumption of innocence? My understanding is that the taxes have been amended so that is no longer an issue.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

NP. At a minimum, it's an error in judgement (if the affair did in fact happen).

Never appropriate to direct campaign/corporate funds to someone that you're sleeping with.

[Anonymous]

This will be swept under the rug like all the Somali financial scandals in Minnesota. “Minnesota Nice” brought Somalis to Minnesota and got Omar elected. They will not go after her even if she shot someone in the middle of the Mall of America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

NP. At a minimum, it's an error in judgement (if the affair did in fact happen).

Never appropriate to direct campaign/corporate funds to someone that you're sleeping with.

Perhaps they’re “just friends” holding hands in public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

NP. At a minimum, it's an error in judgement (if the affair did in fact happen).

Never appropriate to direct campaign/corporate funds to someone that you're sleeping with.

Perhaps they’re “just friends” holding hands in public.

...in an intimate, out-of-the-way restaurant. Fifty miles from the event they were attending.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7301469/Ilhan-Omar-spotted-leaving-restaurant-mystery-man-holding-hands-him.html

[Anonymous]

Discussed this last night with DH, who is Muslim and active in Muslim-anchored political circles. He said a couple of things:

1. The news of the affair, if real, will damage her standing in the Muslim constituency. That said, they will probably still hold their nose and vote for her until another viable candidate emerges, but there won't be much public advocacy for her in religion-centered outlets like mosques, community centers etc. As unobservant as American Muslims can be, there are two hard stops for their behavior in public - open consumption of pork and extramarital sex between Muslim women and nonMuslim men.

2. The brother marriage story is fishy but possible. When the wave of Somali immigrants came to Minnesota, it was quite common for families to commingle and pass nephews and nieces for kids, using the lack of records in war-torn country as a pretext. So that a brother who had a shot at a refugee visa, for instance, could take his sister's kids and claim they are his. No one would know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

NP. At a minimum, it's an error in judgement (if the affair did in fact happen).

Never appropriate to direct campaign/corporate funds to someone that you're sleeping with.

If they started paying him more just so that she could carry on an affair with him, then that is an issue.

I highly doubt the affair started before he was hired to be a consultant on her campaign.

I mean, he was still performing his paid job, right? Not appropriate to get involved with the client, but paying someone for campaign consulting fees is not damning in and of itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about the affair per se, but about using campaign funds to pay her cheating partner. Of course the manifestly poor judgment to have such an affair so early in her career with so many hopes and dreams of her constituents on her, is a valid strike against her. Similarly, engaging in an activity that damages two families and four children is a valid strike against her. Al Franken is in her district. Maybe she should resign and he could take over for her until there is a special election.

You are only guessing that she misused campaign funds. The guy is a legitimate political consultant who did work for her campaign.

And was sleeping with her.

Well then maybe it is a "#metoo" incident but it is not necessarily a campaign finance violation.

NP. At a minimum, it's an error in judgement (if the affair did in fact happen).

Never appropriate to direct campaign/corporate funds to someone that you're sleeping with.

If they started paying him more just so that she could carry on an affair with him, then that is an issue.

I highly doubt the affair started before he was hired to be a consultant on her campaign.

I mean, he was still performing his paid job, right? Not appropriate to get involved with the client, but paying someone for campaign consulting fees is not damning in and of itself.

According to reports, "travel expenses" were not paid to him until around April 1, 2019. That is concerning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If they started paying him more just so that she could carry on an affair with him, then that is an issue.

I highly doubt the affair started before he was hired to be a consultant on her campaign.

I mean, he was still performing his paid job, right? Not appropriate to get involved with the client, but paying someone for campaign consulting fees is not damning in and of itself.

According to reports, "travel expenses" were not paid to him until around April 1, 2019. That is concerning.

which my bolded statement does cover. If she was paying him more in order to carry on the affair, then that is indeed concerning.