The sound of (media) silence, Minnesota edition

Keith Ellison’s alleged domestic abuse of a former girlfriend is not his leading disqualification to serve as Minnesota Attorney General. I think his leading disqualifications for the office are his past involvement with the hate cult known as the Nation of Islam (and his continued lying about same) along with his support for cop killers. Yet we have heard not a word from the Minnesota media about Ellison’s public record in either case as he seeks the position of Minnesota’s top law enforcement officer, while the domestic abuse allegations have been accorded a banner headline — ““Keith Ellison denies abuse allegations,” as it reads in the hard copy — at the top of page one of the Star Tribune today.

In the nature of things Ellison’s alleged domestic abuse will remain unresolved by the time of the DFL primary tomorrow, yet any reporter can verify Ellison’s involvement with the Nation of Islam, his bald lying about it and his past support for cop killers with a quick trip to the clip file. It is certainly old news, but it is old news with new relevance in light of Ellison’s aspiration to wield executive law enforcement authority on behalf of the state of Minnesota. Some DFL voters around the state who are unfamiliar with Ellison would care.

Last week PJ Media New York City editor David Steinberg broke a thoroughly researched story on endorsed DFL Fifth District congressional candidate Ilhan Omar’s apparently fraudulent marriage to husband number 2 based on her recent divorce from him. Steinberg documented the falsity of allegations made under oath by Omar in her default divorce.

Steinberg’s August 8 story was posted online with the evidence he assembled to support it over a period of months. Yesterday Steinberg reviewed and explained the evidence one more time while noting the silence of the Minnesota media since he reported it.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.