One of the more curious habits of modern politics is the insistence that we ignore patterns which, in any other context, would immediately invite scrutiny. We are told that connections do not matter, associations are merely historical accidents, and family ties become irrelevant precisely when they are politically inconvenient.
That indulgence is now being extended to Michigan Senate candidate
Abdul El Sayed. And just because his father-in-law has help fund terrorist organizations is no reason to worry where El Sayed's heart lies.
A review by the Washington Free Beacon found that El Sayed's father in law,
Dr. Jukaku Tayeb, is both one of the largest financial backers of the super PAC supporting El Sayed's campaign and a longtime senior figure within the
Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, an organization federal prosecutors identified during the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing case as a public facing component of the
Muslim Brotherhood's American network.
Tayeb has contributed $200,000 to the
Fighting for Michigan PAC, nearly half of the group's fundraising total through the end of March. This might be considered what is often referred to as financial jihad, as it helps fund jihad causes.
His financial support would already merit attention. His organizational affiliations make the story considerably more significant.
According to ISNA's own publications, Tayeb has served on the organization's 20 member founding committee since at least 2007. Membership on that committee is not ceremonial. Founders are expected to contribute at least $5,000 annually while also supporting the group's Founders Legacy Fund.
Federal prosecutors identified ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator during the landmark Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history. That case resulted in convictions after prosecutors demonstrated that more than $12 million had been funneled to Hamas through charitable fronts. One of the federal prosecutors, you may recall, was
Andy McCarthy, who put the "Blind Sheikh" (Omar Abdel-Rahman) behind bars.
Government filings also identified ISNA as one of several organizations "who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood."
This was not a passing allegation or an abandoned theory. This was big guns, or rather sharp swords, to be more precise.
In a 2009 ruling, a federal judge concluded that the Department of Justice had presented "ample evidence" connecting both ISNA and the
Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR, to Hamas during the litigation.
The court noted that the Holy Land Foundation and ISNA shared banking arrangements and cited evidence showing checks deposited into those accounts were frequently made payable to "the Palestinian Mujahadeen," the original name used by Hamas's military wing.
The ruling also referenced a now well known 1991 memorandum from the Muslim Brotherhood's Shura Council describing its American strategy as "a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."
These are not the inventions of political opponents. They are findings and evidence introduced during one of the most consequential terrorism financing cases in modern American legal history.
Lorenzo Vidino, director of
George Washington University's Program on Extremism, offered little ambiguity regarding ISNA's origins.
"ISNA was historically, no question, an organization created … by the Muslim Brotherhood and fellow travelers from the Indian subcontinent as basically the Islamist organization in America."
He added that Tayeb remained active during years "when they were putting out some really nasty stuff."
"To be on the founding committee, this is the elders of the organization."
Tayeb's involvement did not end there.
IRS records show he served as president of CAIR Michigan from 2005 through 2010 and remains on its board of directors. Like ISNA, CAIR was named as an unindicted co conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation prosecution.
Vidino described the overlap as entirely predictable.
"This is kind of the pattern," he explained. "To some degree, it's a good old boys network. And so, if you're on the board committee in ISNA, chances are you also belong to your local CAIR branch. Chances are you sit on the board of another charity that is part of the network. That's kind of how it works."
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy argued that these relationships have long been visible.
"It’s been obvious since the 1970s that the Muslim Students Associations and ISNA … have very strong ties to the extreme fringes of the Democratic Party."
Meanwhile, El Sayed campaigns beneath lawn signs declaring that he wants to push "money out of politics."
His rhetoric frequently targets
AIPAC, which he accuses of attempting to "buy off government" to "make sure that our money is sent abroad to kill other people."
Yet while condemning outside money, the super PAC sustaining his campaign is heavily financed by his own father in law.
His Democratic opponent,
Representative Haley Stevens, highlighted the contradiction during last week's debate.
"He's great at covering up that his father-in-law is running his super PAC that's spending millions of dollars for him," Stevens said. "Abdul, you talk about getting money out of politics and putting money in people's pockets. But who is putting money in yours? What are you hiding?"
The questions do not stop with campaign finance.
El Sayed has repeatedly appeared alongside some of the loudest anti Israel activists on the American left, including Hasan Piker, who has infamously declared that "America deserved 9/11."
One of El Sayed's former campaign staffers, Mariam Odeh, was indicted in June for allegedly participating in what prosecutors described as a coordinated campaign targeting Jewish officials, businesses, and organizations connected to the University of Michigan.
Perhaps most revealing was El Sayed's own recorded guidance to campaign staff following the death of Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
"I also want to remind you guys that there are a lot of people in Dearborn who are sad today," El Sayed said. "So, like, I just don't want to comment on Khamenei at all. Like, I don't think it's worth even touching that."
That is an extraordinary statement for any American politician. One might have expected even a minimal condemnation of a man responsible for decades of repression, terrorism, and regional instability. Instead, electoral sensitivities apparently took precedence over moral clarity.
None of this proves Abdul El Sayed shares every belief of his father in law or every historical position associated with ISNA or CAIR. Guilt by association is an inadequate standard.
But neither can serious political journalism pretend these relationships are meaningless.
When a candidate's principal financial benefactor occupies a senior leadership position in organizations repeatedly scrutinized in one of America's largest terrorism financing investigations, and when that candidate consistently avoids condemning Islamist figures while courting activists sympathetic to them, the public has every right to ask difficult questions.
The remarkable thing is that so many in the political and media establishment seem determined to insist the questions should never be asked.
I want to thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.
Posts
