Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details
In a Thursday night special, BlazeTV host Glenn Beck laid out the evidence implicating a possible international money laundering scheme linked to Ukrainian gas firm Burisma and former Burisma board member Hunter Biden.
The links provided by Beck show that $1.8 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars sent to Ukraine during the Obama administration is unaccounted for — and raises the question: Why hasn't Congress launched an investigation into how those funds were spent?
What are the details?
During the special, Beck explained that in 2014, $23 million was sent to a bank in London via wire transfer by Mykola Zlochevsky, the head of Burisma. British authorities immediately froze the accounts and began tracing the funds back to their origins.
According to Beck, the evidence suggests that the money had been laundered through the minimally regulated Latvian banking system and transferred into an array of shell companies.
"Not only did Biden not seem to care about his new company being investigated for stealing and laundering money," Beck said, "he also apparently didn't mind that the primary owner of Burisma [Valeriyovych Kolomoyskyi] was on a U.S. visa ban list for — get this — murders and beheadings."
A few weeks after Burisma was implicated in a money laundering ring, Hunter Biden became a board member, and within a few months, then-Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry lobbied for $1.8 billion to be delivered into PrivatBank — which was owned by Kolomoyskyi and became Ukraine's state bank.
That $1.8 billion is still missing and could have gone anywhere — possibly into Kolomoyskyi's own pocket, or possibly spent in whole or in part to bankroll Ukraine's war with Russia, given that the oligarch was known for "bankrolling" the conflict. But if the funds were used to fund a war with Russia, those taxpayer dollars were not authorized by Congress.
The International Monetary Fund has also been investigating corruption and money laundering in Ukraine, and in 2016, the Ukrainian government finally seized PrivatBank from Kolomoyskyi for enriching himself off of IMF loans.
On September 10, 2019, the IMF informed the White House Budget Office that there was an "obligating event" that needed to occur in order for Ukraine to receive further IMF funds.
On Sept. 11, police special forces raided PrivatBank, seizing documents and evidence needed to investigate the scheme. The same day, President Donald Trump released military aid to Ukraine.
"Trump wanted a public announcement of 'investigations,' and everyone assumed that he meant an interview on CNN," Beck said. "I'd say a special forces daylight raid on Ukraine's biggest and most corrupt bank is one hell of a public announcement."
When the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) held its annual convention, only one of the presidential candidates who is campaigning in Iowa attended the event alongside an un-indicted World Trade Center bombing co-conspirator and supporter of killing gay people —Senator Bernie Sanders.
Bernie’s appearance at ISNA’s presidential forum was moderated by an Islamist who had described Hezbollah’s terrorism against Israel as “legitimate resistance”. This wasn’t unusual. Bernie’s campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, had been a member of an Islamist organization in college where he had been accused of helping raise money for a Hamas front group.
And CAIR’s presidential poll demonstrates that Bernie’s Islamist outreach is paying off. CAIR’s poll of Muslim voters claims that 39% support Bernie Sanders, while only 27% back Joe Biden.
In Iowa, 5 mosques hosted caucuses as “satellite sites” meant as “safe spaces” for Muslims. Muslims in Iowa don’t need a safe space. No one is going to be assaulting them at Democrat caucuses. But holding these satellite caucuses in mosques gives Islamic organizations spaces under their control.
Iowa Democrats had decided to aggressively erode the boundaries of mosque and state and the caucuses went forward with voters having to remove their shoes if they wanted to caucus. Of the ten satellite caucus facilities in Des Moines, only one is a church and four are mosques.
The first site of the Iowa satellite caucus was the Muslim Community Organization, also known as Masjid An-Noor, where there was widespread support for Bernie Sanders. Imam Jaaphar Abdul Hamed of the mosque endorsed Bernie Sanders and welcomed Rep. Ilhan Omar, an Islamist and anti-Semitic Sanders backer. And 99% of the mosque caucus, caucused for Bernie Sanders. That gave Bernie 9 delegates.
These were the kinds of tribal results you tend to see in elections in Iraq or Afghanistan. Now in Iowa.
“When the Prophet built his mosque, he didn’t build it just for salah,” Imam Hamed told Middle East Eye, an Islamist site linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. “The mosque is a place for everything that concerns Muslims.” And Mohammed’s theocratic elimination of the separation of mosque and state is in play in Iowa.
Abshir Omar, a Somali refugee and former CAIR-Iowa director, hired by Bernie Sanders as his Iowa political coordinator, described this as his mosque. Counter-terrorism expert John Guandolo has said that Omar told him that Islam calls for the murder of gay people.
At the second mosque, the Al Najah Islamic Center, a majority came out for Bernie Sanders. The actual caucus address is for the Tawba Islamic Center. This appears to be a largely Somali mosque. Pictures from the actual caucus show Bernie signs on the wall and a non-Somali Muslim crowd.
There is no explanation given for the discrepancy. But it’s a pattern with the Muslim satellite caucus sites having either the wrong names or the wrong addresses listed, either in error or deliberately. Mosques are routinely listed as cultural centers. This raises questions about the credibility of the Iowa caucuses which the botched results only reinforce.
A majority at the Bosnian Islamic Center Zem Zem backed Bernie.
The name of the Islamic location is wrongly listed as “Zen Zen”. Islamic organizations are not very “Zen”. Despite its name, it is a mosque built by Muslim refugees.
The Islamic and Education Center Ezan was the fourth mosque. This is another Bosnian mosque decorated with the declaration, “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet”. Not exactly the cradle of democracy.
While the Ezan mosque initially split between Bernie and Biden, Biden eventually won 6 delegates to 3 of Bernie’s because of his support for the Muslim side in the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.
The fifth was the Islamic and Cultural Center Bosniak in Granger. This is the mega-mosque built by the Center in Des Moines over in Granger because its Muslim attendees were too crowded in Des Moines. An imam from the mosque had previously been arrested for sexually assaulting a mother and daughter. This caucus appears to have been won by Biden.
The satellite mosque caucus locations provide Islamists in Iowa with disproportionate influence. And that influence was used to benefit Bernie Sanders who has emerged as the Islamist candidate. While Biden tended to perform better in the Bosnian mosques, Sanders was the Islamist winner. This is not a wholly new development.
Bernie had also pandered to Islamist groups in 2016 and won 60% of the vote in Dearbornistan. (Dearborn, MI).The Arab American News had claimed that “Arab Americans voted 2 to 1 for Sanders in almost every east Dearborn precinct.” But in the 2020 race, he has effectively outsourced his campaign to Islamists.
Sanders had also received the endorsement of Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad, the only Muslim elected official in the Iowa House. Samad had chaired the American Muslim Alliance. The AMA has a history of co-sponsoring anti-Semitic events, including one which called Jews “pigs and monkeys” and another which had cheered the murder of Jews. “Muslims, we will make a difference in this race; we will make a difference across this country,” Samad had vowed, while standing next to Rep. Ilhan Omar.
In Iowa, pandering to Islamists appears to have paid off. While Muslims only make up a small percentage of Iowa’s population, the caucus system can allow small groups to exercise a disproportionate impact if they are willing to get involved. And in Iowa, mosques not only got involved, but were able to host 5 satellite caucuses. That’s not enough to shift the balance. But enough to have an impact. And that is what is truly worrisome. While the Democrats worried about Russian hackers, the real hacking in Iowa caucuses was being carried out by Islamists who were operating on the inside.
“The mosque should be involved because even during the prophet’s time, all the decisions were made in the mosque,” a mosque worshiper commented at a caucus that went almost entirely for Bernie Sanders.
Should the Iowa caucuses really be decided in a mosque?
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
