Watch: Omar's April Interview Contains Devastating Admission - If DOJ Investigated Her, They'd Know She's Guilty
There’s an old idea in sports that it’s not a terrible idea to keep your words soft and sweet — in case you have to eat them.
This is relevant in today’s political discourse because, as we all know, leftists hate sports.
And that’s a shame (not really), because if lawmakers like progressive Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar actually knew how to appreciate the meritocracy of sports, it might’ve saved her from this damning video from about six months ago.
Appearing on the Breakfast Club with host Charlamagne tha God, Omar covered a wide range of topics.
But none of these six-month-old remarks have aged quite like Omar’s thoughts about how an investigation is supposed to work.
“The Justice Department has said that they’re also going to look into your husband. Are you concerned about that?” one of the co-hosts asked Omar.
“They haven’t said… I haven’t seen a single investigation,” Omar said. She also quipped, “If you know of some let me know.”
Well. There is an investigation into Omar now, after federal agents raided her residence on Monday. And it’s not even the only investigation into Omar.
But as any sensible, non-partisan hack will tell you, an investigation does not mean that there is wrongdoing. Omar is innocent until proven guilty, just like every other alleged criminal in U.S. history.
Interestingly enough, however, it’s not clear just how sensible Omar is (there’s little doubt she’s partisan). Because look at what else she had to say about being investigated.
“I mean, if you’ve done something illegal, you would investigate,” Omar said.
Oh. Is that how this works? An investigation is enough to pass a guilty verdict? Because you only investigate if “you’ve done something illegal,” according to Omar.
And look, it doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to connect the dots on why Omar wants to peddle this line. President Donald Trump had his residence raided once upon a time, and it’s clear that that investigation was enough to convict the president in the court of the left.
That tough talk was clearly meant to cast judgement on President Trump, particularly after the Mar-a-Lago raid.
But now that it’s Omar the one under investigation, I wonder if she’d appreciate being presumed guilty. Probably not. So why is it so hard for online reactionaries on the left to offer this same grace to conservatives that they so willingly offer to Omar?
The principle of innocent until proven guilty shouldn’t be some partisan luxury, available only to politicians whose names are followed by the correct letter in parentheses.
Either investigations are evidence of wrongdoing, or they’re not. And if Omar wants to enjoy the presumption of innocence today, she should’ve been willing to extend that same courtesy to her political opponents six months ago.
That’s what makes this whole episode so frustrating. The standards for guilt and innocence seem to change depending on who’s standing on the receiving end of a federal investigation. Just look at the way, say, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responded to the Mar-a-Lago raid (this is good) versus her response to the Omar raid (this is bad).
And that brings us back to those soft and sweet words. When you spend years treating your political opponents as guilty until proven innocent, you shouldn’t be surprised when your own words come back to haunt you.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
