Hypocrite Democrats shriek at Ilhan Omar probe — while vowing lawfare on the GOP

· New York Post

Democrats, suffering from denial and delusion, tend to think of themselves as the guardians of the rule of law.

Back in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

Consider Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who fancies herself a rule-of-law-championing model immigrant despite the fact she literally conceded to her constituents that she’s “Somali first” and “Muslim second.”

Earlier this month, Omar’s Washington, DC, home was raided by the feds.

Over a dozen Homeland Security agents, executing a duly issued search warrant, seized items like cellphones and notebooks.

Omar, always eager to play victim, dismissed the investigation as “bizarre,” “pointless,” and an intimidation tactic from a political foe.

Former President Barack Obama defended her, using the same “intimidation” argument.

They’re wrong.

The magistrate judge who found probable cause to issue the warrant is Matthew Sharbaugh, a liberal who donated to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and clerked twice for an Obama-appointed judge.

Here’s the latest on the ongoing immigration investigation of Rep. Ilhan Omar

And many details of Omar’s fraudulent history have long been public.

There’s evidence that her confusing marriage history was concocted to commit immigration fraud.

Then there’s her shocking alleged net worth spike — particularly notable due to her close nexus to Minnesota’s long-running Somali fraud ring.

None of this looks kosher (or, if you will, halal).

The feds’ investigation is legitimate and, frankly, overdue.

More to the point: Do Democrats pretend to have forgotten about the Biden-era lawfare hell they unleashed on the republic?

Perhaps — but Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) has made sure we won’t soon forget Democrats’ dystopian and un-American view of the rule of law.

One day after Omar’s home raid, Slotkin — a purported “moderate,” the media never cease to tell us — made some of the most repulsive comments by a sitting US senator in recent memory.

At an event at the University of Chicago, Slotkin admitted her desire to pursue “signature” legal cases against those who have “enabled” Trump, in order to push a “deterrence message” to young people.

Translation: Let’s prosecute and lock up Trump staffers because they are, well, Trump staffers.

Slotkin wants to criminalize conservatism itself.

Way to say the quiet part out loud, senator.

Maybe Slotkin is too dimwitted to realize that “thought crimes” — beliefs that offend her delicate sensibilities — aren’t supposed to actually precipitate prosecution.

Or maybe Slotkin is just a tyrant.

Democrats have cried foul at the feds’ alleged “political witch hunt” against Omar.

But Slotkin has announced an explicit and preemptive witch hunt against young patriots who serve, or wish to serve, in a Republican administration.

Once upon a time, President John Kennedy, an iconic Democrat of his era, quipped: “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.”

He was right: Public service should be encouraged, not dissuaded.

Fast-forward six decades, and Kennedy’s partisan progeny now fantasize about locking up Republicans who wish to heed his call.

If that weren’t enough, who can forget how Democrats have savaged prominent Republican judicial nominees like Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh?

The effect is the same: Good patriots are dissuaded from serving.

I take personal umbrage at Slotkin.

I serve on the advisory board for American Moment, the right’s leading organization for educating and credentialing future leaders in public service.

Slotkin’s message is clear: Cease, or risk prison time.

She can go pound sand.

The rot runs deeper than Slotkin.

Democratic House leaders, from Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on down, have openly entertained the possibility of impeachment proceedings or other crippling investigations if Democrats retake the chamber.

Many in the caucus are champing at the bit for a third Trump impeachment.

What for, exactly? It’s unclear.

Maybe they just want to send a “deterrence message.”

A durable rule of law is indispensable for human freedom and flourishing.

That’s why John Adams, in a 1776 letter, argued “the very definition of a Republic, is an Empire of Laws, and not of men.”

Adams, like many of his contemporaries, is surely rolling in his grave.

It was Obama who began this dystopian inversion of the rule of law.

Remember Lois Lerner of the IRS and her persecution of the Tea Party?

President Joe Biden, with Attorney General Merrick Garland and “Special Counsel” Jack Smith, then took it to another level.

Now Democrats are doubling down again.

When it comes to the lawfare of the past, we can hope justice and accountability come soon.

But when it comes to the possible lawfare of the future, two very different visions of the rule of law are on the midterm ballot.

Choose wisely — and vote accordingly.

Josh Hammer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and author of “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.”