We all know that Huma Abedin is Hillary Clinton’s closest personal aide. Hillary has referred to Huma in the past as a “daughter.”

I don’t think that characterization is entirely accurate. As the mother of a daughter myself, I can honestly say that we want better for our daughters than we had for ourselves. One needs to only look at the husband of Chelsea Clinton, Marc Mezvinsky, as compared to the husband of Huma Abedin, Anthony Weiner, to tell you exactly how “Hillary’s daughters” have fared. Hillary may refer to Huma as a “second daughter,” but she really is Hillary 2.0, right down to the marital scandals.

And as Hillary 2.0, she has quietly ridden coattails to power. If all had gone according to plan, the coattails would have been her husband’s, but… well, we all know how that imploded. Not once, but twice. (And one quietly wonders how the Bill Clinton presidency would have ended if technology like Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, along with cell phone video cameras, had existed in the 1990’s.) So Huma is back on Hillary’s coattails to power once more.

But Huma is quiet, and has loyally defended Hillary for decades – including being called to testify in the Clinton homebrew server case.

And yet through it all, Huma has been allowed to pass under the radar about her family’s ties to radical Islam. A New York Post story out today is attempting to shed light on these known connections.

For a decade, Huma Abedin edited a radical Muslim publication that opposed women’s rights and blamed the US for 9/11 https://t.co/5n5B3Ve5pC

— New York Post (@nypost) August 21, 2016

The “radical Muslim journal” being referenced here is the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, where Huma’s mother, Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is editor-in-chief.

One of Clinton’s biggest accomplishments listed on her campaign Web site is her support for the UN women’s conference in Bejing in 1995, when she famously declared, “Women’s rights are human rights.” Her speech has emerged as a focal point of her campaign, featured prominently in last month’s Morgan Freeman-narrated convention video introducing her as the Democratic nominee.

However, soon after that “historic and transformational” 1995 event, as Clinton recently described it, her top aide Huma Abedin published articles in a Saudi journal taking Clinton’s feminist platform apart, piece by piece. At the time, Abedin was assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs working under her mother, who remains editor-in-chief. She was also working in the White House as an intern for then-First Lady Clinton.

Headlined “Women’s Rights are Islamic Rights,” a 1996 article argues that single moms, working moms and gay couples with children should not be recognized as families. It also states that more revealing dress ushered in by women’s liberation “directly translates into unwanted results of sexual promiscuity and irresponsibility and indirectly promote violence against women.” In other words, sexually liberated women are just asking to be raped.

Now imagine that a Trump aide had this connection, and these published articles, on his or her resume. Can’t you imagine the media meltdown?

But since this is Huma Abedin we are talking about, who is officially under Queen Hillary’s imperial protection, the media is stone silent.

And given what we know about Huma’s role in Hillary’s life, that protection also comes with power.

Don't worry, it's not as if Hillary gave Abedin access to sensitive defence information.. Oh? er.. never mind. https://t.co/c01FhEG4aE

— RealAust (@RealAust) August 21, 2016

Hillary will never allow Huma to leave her, ever. The only question is whether the Clinton campaign can successfully get their media allies to ignore and bury this story yet again. Because Huma Abedin, who has so far proved her loyalty through Clinton omerta, is not going to have to talk about her family’s opinions and views on Islam. Or her mother’s connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. The media has been told to treat her as “poor, wronged Huma, with her pervert of a husband” and never question her about anything – not even comments and articles in direct contradiction to Hillary’s gold-plated feminist platform.