Ellison

As expected, the Democrats don't like any of Donald Trump's recent candidates for his cabinet—as if that's a surprise. But the candidate they like least is Jeff Sessions. Trump's appointee for Attorney General is a right winger who said and did some questionable things 30 years ago. But his more recent history is reasonably solid, if very conservative. I don't like his stands on some social issues, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't make an attorney general that executes his office ethically and manages the DoJ without blatant partisanship. That, in and of itself, would be a refreshing change from the DoJ under the leadership of Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. Since the Democrats are upset about Sessions' past "extremist" views, a thorough vetting is justified.

Interesting though, that the Dems seem unconcerned about the extremist left-wing and cryto-Islamist views of the likely nominee for DNC chair, Keith Ellison. An extreme left winger, Ellison is being championed by none other than Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren—as it that's a surprise. Scott Johnson comments:

Ellison embodies the identity politics on which the Democrats have staked so much of their success. As a black Muslim in a one-party town with a left-wing newspaper (Minneapolis's Star Tribune), it has served him well. Ellison has been insulated from the kind of media scrutiny that his checkered past would have received elsewhere.

Although there are practical political grounds for doubting that Ellison is the man to lead the Democrats back to power, that is an issue for Democrats. The case against Ellison that should concern all Americans is moral. To borrow a term, he is a bad hombre...

Ellison's history as an active member and local leader of the Nation of Islam remains a deep secret to Ellison's constituents in his district. He blatantly lied about it when he was running in the 2006 DFL primary. He suppressed it in his 2014 memoir, My Country, 'Tis of Thee. Indeed, in his memoir he presented himself as a critic of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.

Speaking of Farrakhan, Ellison writes in his memoir: "He could only wax eloquent while scapegoating other groups." Ellison writes of the Nation of Islam itself: "In the NOI, if you're not angry in opposition to some group of people (whites, Jews, so-called 'sellout' blacks), you don't have religion."

He should know. He was speaking from his own personal experience in the cult.

Ellison was not happy when the Star Tribune published my column "Ellison remembers to forget" on its opinion page. In the column I restored some of his own history that he had left out of his memoir. He promptly sent out a fundraising letter to his fans asserting that my column represented "a new low" in the manifestation of anti-Muslim bigotry against him.

The cry of bigotry was another lie, but Ellison invited St. Paul Pioneer Press political reporter Rachel Stassen-Berger and others on his email list to fight back against his alleged victimization with a modest contribution to his campaign. I posted a copy of his fundraising letter to Stassen-Berger in "In which Keith Ellison finds me of use."

How has Ellison gotten away with his act? It helps to be a Democrat. It helps to be black. It helps to be a Muslim. It helps to have a sympathetic press. It helps to play to a Minneapolis crowd in a one-party town. And yet Ellison seeks to take his act to a national audience. He dreams of higher office.

Hmmm. Let's see. It's perfectly okay for Dems and their media hamsters to examine 30-year old statements from Jeff Sessions and accuse him of "racism," but it's absolutely not okay to examine the far more recent history of Keith Ellsion. After all, if one were to do that, you'd have to conclude that Ellison is an anti-Semite, an extreme left-wing Islamist, and a closet supporter of Louis Farrakan—a person at least as contemptible as David Duke.

But Ellison will skate because he's a member of multiple protected classes. That has become S.O.P. for the democrats and exemplifies a laughable level of hypocrisy.