‘Won’t Survive As CEC’: Rahul Gandhi warns BJP over backing Gyanesh Kumar, hints at big revelation
Rahul Gandhi says CEC Gyanesh Kumar won’t survive, warns BJP against backing him. INDIA bloc passes impeachment resolution ahead of Ramlila rally.
Jaishankar at G20: ‘No military solutions’ to conflicts, calls for diversified supply chains
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar called for diplomatic solutions to global conflicts and urged the G20 to strengthen energy security and diversify global supply chains.
Delhi Witnesses INDIA Bloc, BJP Showdown: Ramlila Maidan rally, 1984 riots march today
INDIA bloc and BJP hold rival marches in Delhi on November 1, with the Opposition targeting CEC Gyanesh Kumar over electoral roll irregularities and the BJP remembering the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
INDIA Bloc Rally Today: Delhi deploys 10,000 security personnel, 250 CCTV cameras; Check traffic restrictions
Nearly 10,000 police and paramilitary personnel, 250 AI-enabled CCTV cameras and drones will monitor the INDIA bloc’s November 1 rally at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan.
How House Democrats’ ‘deterrence message’ on Trump jobs could backfire
Sen. Elissa Slotkin’s warning to young Americans not to join the Trump administration could backfire by handing Trump officials legal ammunition to derail the investigations Democrats hope to launch if they retake Congress, a former federal prosecutor warned. The freshman Michigan Democrat said last month that she wants her party to pursue “signature cases” against officials who helped Trump, reasoning that it would discourage young Americans from considering jobs in his administration. “I want that deterrence message sent,” Slotkin said during an Oct. 13 event at the University of Chicago, describing how young graduates might fear “buying myself a ton of problems” by joining the administration. But Abhishek Kambli, a former deputy associate attorney general in Trump’s Justice Department, said Slotkin’s remarks could backfire if Democrats retake either chamber of Congress in the midterm elections and gain greater control over congressional investigations. “If they just throw in boilerplate language that this is for legislative purpose, anyone challenging those subpoenas will have that entire record to demonstrate that it’s anything but that,” Kambli, a partner at Holtzman Vogel, told Fox News Digital. HOUSE DEMS PLOT TRUMP INVESTIGATION BLITZ IF THEY SEIZE MAJORITY While Congress has broad authority to conduct investigations, subpoena witnesses and review government operations, the Supreme Court has ruled that lawmakers cannot use those powers solely to punish individuals. The Supreme Court confronted those limits in 2020, when House Democrats attempted to obtain Trump’s personal financial records through congressional subpoenas. In Trump v. Mazars, the justices established a four-factor test requiring courts to examine whether Congress demonstrated a legitimate legislative need for the records, whether its requests were sufficiently narrow, whether the information could be obtained elsewhere and what burden the subpoenas would impose on the president. The court sent the dispute back to lower courts without ruling that the subpoenas satisfied those standards, leaving unresolved questions about how the framework would be applied. “So it’s not enough just to tack on a legislative purpose,” Kambli said, arguing that courts must look beyond Congress’ stated reasons for an investigation to determine whether its demands are constitutionally justified. Democrats’ public remarks could become evidence against them if future subpoenas are challenged, according to Kambli. SLOTKIN WANTS GOP PROSECUTIONS TO DETER YOUNG PEOPLE FROM TRUMP ADMINISTRATION JOBS “They don’t have to bury their head in the sand,” Kambli said of the courts. “I think they have to look at the facts of the case and look at it in terms of how they fits into the broader comments that they made.” House Democrats are already laying the groundwork for investigations into Trump’s family business dealings and potential conflicts of interest if they regain control of Congress. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., has also vowed to expand his investigation into donors funding Trump’s White House ballroom if Democrats retake the Senate, But another constitutional law expert questioned whether Democrats’ remarks would carry enough legal weight to undermine future congressional investigations. Michael Morley, a professor at Florida State University College of Law, said courts generally recognize that politicians bring partisan motivations to congressional investigations and would be reluctant to invalidate subpoenas merely because of provocative public remarks. “I don’t think that the fact that there might be partisan motivations for a congressional investigation would ultimately be a valid basis for refusing to comply with a subpoena,” Morley told Fox News Digital. “At the end of the day, a court is going to be very reluctant to conclude, based on one or more members’ possible subjective motivations, that Congress lacks constitutional authority to investigate,” Morley said. SLOTKIN’S VIRAL ‘THREAT’ TO CONSERVATIVES TAKES NEW TWIST AS STUDENT MOVES TO HOLD HER ACCOUNTABLE: ‘SHOCKING’ He also emphasized that Trump v. Mazars focused specifically on subpoenas for the president’s personal records, arguing that applying the same heightened legal standards to subpoenas targeting other administration officials would be a stretch. But Morley said Slotkin’s language could give judges pause when the legal basis for a subpoena is already uncertain. “It’s bad atmospherics,” he said, adding that such statements could make courts “marginally less likely” to resolve doubts in Democrats’ favor. Slotkin has rejected accusations that she wants to target Americans merely for working for Republicans. She told CNN that she was talking about officials who break the law or misuse taxpayer dollars, calling the criticism “manufactured outrage.” But Kambli warned the consequences could extend beyond whether Democratic subpoenas survive legal challenges, saying that investigations could inflict financial and reputational damage even without criminal charges. “There is the idea that the process is the punishment, and there is no doubt that some members of Congress intend to use the process to bankrupt people that can’t afford legal representation,” Kambli said. He also said that while Trump’s Justice Department would be unlikely to prosecute administration officials over criminal contempt referrals from a Democratic-controlled Congress, that could change under a future Democratic administration. Morley also criticized the prospect of intimidating young government employees who may lack the resources to defend themselves. “That’s just not how we want our political disputes to be handled,” Morley said.
Veteran Dem operative says subpar GOP candidates poised to hand over Senate majority
A top Democratic operative warned that poor campaigns and candidate choice from Republicans are opening the door for Democrats to seize control of the Senate during an interview with Fox News Digital. Dan Turrentine, who served as chief of staff to current Colorado Gov. Jared Polis when he was a member of Congress, said several close Senate races seem to be trending Democrat in the leadup to Tuesday’s election. “Five days out, Democrats have a pretty good chance to retake the Senate,” Turrentine said. He cited several races, including North Carolina, where incumbent Republican Sen. Thom Tillis is retiring. That seat, which has long been red, seems poised to flip as polls show former Gov. Roy Cooper holds a commanding lead over former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Whatley. SENATE CONTROL IS A COIN FLIP — AND DEMOCRATS’ PATH RUNS THROUGH TRUMP COUNTRY Republicans, who are widely projected to lose their slim House majority, currently hold a 53-47 lead in the Senate. In addition to North Carolina, a number of surprisingly close Senate races in both swing states like Ohio and Michigan, and in typically deep red states such as Texas, Kansas and Missouri, have Democrats like Turrentine hopeful they can gain full control of Congress on Tuesday. While crediting smart campaigning from Democrats, Turrentine also pinned Republican shortcomings on what he called poor candidate quality. He cited Ken Paxton in Texas, Cindy Hyde-Smith in Mississippi, Roger Marshall in Kansas and Darlene Graham Nordone, who is running to take the seat of her late brother, former Sen. Lindsey Graham. GOP SENATE MAJORITY FACES FRESH UNCERTAINTY AS 2 KEY RACES TIGHTEN DAYS BEFORE MIDTERMS “If Republicans lose the Senate, it’s likely one of those four loses,” said Turrentine, who hosts “The Huddle” podcast with former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer. “While the president’s standing is part of the problem, that last mile comes down to weak candidate quality.” FOX NEWS POWER RANKINGS: SOUTH CAROLINA MOVES TO TOSS-UP But while Democrats are performing well in polls, Turrentine acknowledged that previous surveys have overstated support for his party. “Campaigns are terrified about polling,” he said, adding that “reaching voters is harder than ever; people don’t have landlines and routinely ignore unknown numbers.” THE SILENT MAJORITY PROBLEM AND WHY CAMPAIGN POLLSTERS KEEP ‘FIGHTING THE LAST WAR’ ON ELECTIONS “We’ve had consecutive change elections — 2016, 2022, 2024 — where polling struggled to capture late-breaking dynamics. Will frustrated Trump voters stay home, or will early Democratic surges in Texas just reflect high-propensity voters banking votes early rather than expanding the electorate? Nobody knows, and people have a knot in their stomach about Tuesday,” he said. Turrentine was a even more confident in a Democratic takeover of the Senate before this week’s bombshell New York Times report alleging that Alaska Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola helped recruit a man named Daniel J. Sullivan to run against incumbent Sen. Daniel S. Sullivan, R-Alaska, to ostensibly confuse voters into accidentally choosing Daniel J. Sullivan over the incumbent senator. MARY PELTOLA’S CAMPAIGN, DEMS BACKED COVERT SCHEME TO FIELD SPOILER CANDIDATES IN ALASKA SENATE RACE: REPORT Peltola has denied any involvement in the former Sullivan’s campaign. “Peltola has led almost every single poll until yesterday. Like so many of these states, Democrats win on disgruntled Republicans. It wouldn’t take much for those voters to say they can’t stomach the Democrat,” said Turrentine, adding that the Frontier State may now be a tossup. If Alaska’s Senate seat slips from the Democrats’ grip, a majority could come down to the Democrats winning Ohio, Texas and one of Michigan, Maine, Kansas or Mississippi, Turrentine said. “In Maine, we’ve spent entire careers thinking we’re going to defeat [GOP incumbent] Susan Collins. It feels slightly different this time, but it also doesn’t; she’s within a point or two. No Democrat wants the majority coming down to Maine or Alaska,” he added. Collins trails Graham Platner replacement Troy Jackson 49-45, according to a recent CNN poll. If the Democrats do take the Senate, Turrentine suggested, they will have to contend with the rising tide of socialism and an increasingly popular far-left wing within the party. “This tension between who will be what I’ll call the majority makers and the base that feels like… both feel like, ‘You need me,’ right? A moderate can’t win if the base doesn’t turn out,” Turrentine added. He relayed party criticisms of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who is poised to become speaker should the Democrats wrest control of the lower chamber from the GOP. “Nobody knows where Hakeem Jeffries comes down. And no one knows who Hakeem Jeffries is,” Turrentine said. “Pelosi had the trust of both wings; Hakeem Jeffries still faces questions from both sides about where he stands, all while [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer watches for a primary challenge from his left,” he added.
Trump prosecutions under Biden set precedent for DOJ’s Alaska ‘Decoy Dan’ probe, ex-FEC chair says
The Justice Department is investigating allegations that Democratic operatives recruited Alaska Senate candidate Daniel J. Sullivan, dubbed “Decoy Dan,” to siphon votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, prompting liberal-leaning election law experts to accuse the Trump administration of federal overreach. But former Federal Election Commission member Hans von Spakovsky argued that the Biden-era Justice Department’s prosecution of Donald Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election laid the groundwork for the Alaska probe. “The Justice Department has talked about a potential conspiracy to defraud the voters of Alaska and people are saying, ‘Oh, he’s got no case. That’s a weak case,’” von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, told Fox News Digital. “Well, I suggest you do a Google search and pull up the indictment that Jack Smith got against Donald Trump in the District of Columbia. He set a precedent for this.” MARY PELTOLA’S CAMPAIGN, DEMS BACKED COVERT SCHEME TO FIELD SPOILER CANDIDATES IN ALASKA SENATE RACE: REPORT Joined by FBI officials and Alaska State Troopers, Alaska U.S. Attorney Michael Heyman announced at a news conference Friday that the Justice Department has been investigating whether Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired school teacher who will appear on the ballot without a party affiliation, was colluding with Democratic operatives tied to Democratic candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign. The Justice Department previously sued Alaska election officials, seeking to block certification if Sen. Dan Sullivan loses re-election by fewer votes than those cast for Daniel J. Sullivan. The lawsuit was amended Friday to include reporting by The New York Times that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and senior aides of Peltola’s campaign allegedly worked to recruit candidates who could pull votes away from Sen. Sulllivan. Heyman mentioned the Times reporting repeatedly at the news conference. “We are taking that extremely seriously,” Heyman said. Sources at the Justice Department told Fox News Thursday the Trump administration had issued more than 30 subpoeanas in a span of 24 hours as part of its criminal investigation into the alleged collusion, but Heyman did not say at the news conference what criminal charges are being pursued. “I’m not making any assumptions on whether a crime has been committed or not,” Heyman said. “That’s why we are conducting that thorough investigation.” Von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission commissioner, said potential indictments of Democratic operatives in the Alaska Senate race could rely on federal statutes similar to those Smith, the former special counsel, used in his 2023 indictment of Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the election. Von Spakovsky pointed to charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights. In Trump’s case, prosecutors alleged that he used fraud and deceit to obstruct the federal government’s process for certifying the 2020 election and conspired to deprive voters of having their lawful votes counted and honored. Von Spakovsky said prosecutors could potentially apply similar theories in Alaska if they determine that Democratic operatives knowingly recruited Daniel J. Sullivan to confuse voters and divert votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan. ALASKA’S GOVERNOR ORDERS INVESTIGATION AFTER NYT REPORT ON ALLEGED DEM-LINKED SENATE ELECTION SCHEME Smith’s “indictment is basically along exactly those same lines, claiming that Donald Trump was trying to defraud U.S. voters from fair and honest elections. So, Jack Smith and Democrats, they set the precedent for the kind of investigation Justice Department is doing now.” Aubrey Wieber, executive director of 907 Initiative, a progressive advocacy group running critical ads against Sen. Sullivan, told Alaska Public Media that the news conference announcing the investigation “on the eve of the election” may be stemming from ulterior motives. “One could say it appears that they are trying to interfere in an election and put their thumb on the scale,” Wieber said. The Justice Department’s lawsuit was filed Oct. 22, prompting a parade of condemnations from those who argued the federal government had “no authority” to intervene, with many pointing to the Alaska Supreme Court rejecting the state’s push to disqualify Daniel J. Sullivan from appearing on the ballot. GOVERNOR PROBING ‘DECOY DAN’ SULLIVAN ELECTION SCANDAL WARNS SYSTEM FLAW HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT “DOJ’s theory: Two candidates named Sullivan might confuse voters. The Alaska Supreme Court settled that in June, and the ballot labels the incumbent. DOJ has no role in state election law,” Omar Noureldin, senior vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause, a self-described non-partisan watchdog organization. Von Spakovsky called recruiting a candidate with the same name as a political opponent a “dirty trick” but said the recruitment itself was not necessarily a criminal violation. He said the legal analysis could change if operatives paid the candidate or provided services to help organize his campaign. “The place you run into potential issues is not only if you just recruit a candidate, but you’re being paid to recruit that candidate, and you then provide services to help him run his campaign and organize it,” Von Spakovsky said. Providing campaign assistance outside of being a volunteer is an in-kind contribution subject to federal reporting and contribution rules. Von Spakovsky said any failure to properly report such contributions could create a separate campaign-finance violation.
Major US children’s hospital opens historic detransition clinic after $10M legal showdown
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Tuesday that the nation’s first-ever detransition clinic has opened at Texas Children’s Hospital after a $10 million settlement with the state. The announcement comes after Paxton reached a settlement with TCH in May, finalized in August, requiring the hospital to pay $10 million to resolve government claims and separately establish and fund a detransition clinic. The new clinic provides “detransition-related medical care to patients through age 21, along with detransition-related obstetric and gynecologic care to patients older than 21,” according to Paxton’s office. “In accordance with my settlement with Texas Children’s Hospital, the nation’s first-ever Detransition Clinic is now open,” Paxton said in a statement. “I will continue to ensure that this clinic provides the care and support that victims of the radical left’s gender ideology deserve. A LANDMARK TEXAS RULING BREATHES NEW LIFE INTO ONE DETRANSITIONER’S QUEST FOR JUSTICE “Together, we will protect our children and defeat the dangerous ideology that has inflicted irreversible harm on innocent kids.” Paxton is running for election in Texas’ 2026 Senate race. President Donald Trump campaigned in two separate Texas cities, Corpus Christi and Lubbock, Tuesday in an effort to boost Paxton’s Senate bid. The Trump administration has been targeting initiatives related to transgender people in recent months. Trump announced in August that his administration will cease providing funding for gender transition surgeries using Medicaid for minors. Paxton’s office did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. A TCH spokesperson told Fox News Digital Wednesday the hospital prioritizes providing patients “the highest standard of care,” including through the detransition clinic. “First and foremost, patients and families are at the center of all we do, and we will always provide the highest standard of care, including through this clinic, which formalizes the supportive, multidisciplinary services we have and will continue to deliver,” the TCH spokesperson said. “Given the multidisciplinary approach, care may be delivered in multiple locations, depending on individual patient needs. “All services provided will be within our hospital’s existing licensure and scope,” the spokesperson added. “Services will include endocrinology, surgery, primary care, fertility counseling, psychiatry, psychology, social work/case management and speech pathology. The clinic is operational, and we are complying with all requirements in the settlement agreement.” The TCH spokesperson also told Fox News Digital the hospital is “actively triaging prospective patients” for the detransition clinic. “Protecting the privacy of our patients and their families is a top priority, thus we are unable to share patient information,” the spokesperson stated. “We are actively triaging prospective patients through our established intake process. We can tell you that, thus far, we have not yet had clinical appointments with patients.” INSURANCE COMPANIES PUT ON NOTICE FOR STRANDING TRANS PATIENTS WHO WANT TO REVERSE SURGERIES TCH is required to fully fund services provided through the detransition clinic for its first five years, ensuring patients receive those services at no cost, and must also publicize the clinic on its website, according to the settlement. The May settlement also required TCH to pay $10 million to resolve claims brought under the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act and the federal False Claims Act over allegations that the hospital improperly billed Texas Medicaid for gender-transition treatments, according to Paxton’s office. Do No Harm, a medical advocacy organization critical of gender-transition treatments for minors, estimates 13,994 minors received gender-transition-related medical interventions between 2019 and 2023, based on its analysis of insurance claims data. A Fox News poll published Oct. 21 found that Democratic candidate James Talarico and Paxton were tied at 49% among likely voters in the Lone Star State.
Who are Ilhan Omar’s lawyers? Meet the high-powered Dem attorneys the embattled rep hired
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has tapped two high-powered Washington, D.C.-based attorneys who have previously represented elected officials at the highest echelon of American politics. Amid dueling federal investigations — one for immigration fraud and another for financial disclosure discrepancies — the embattled Somali-born lawmaker hired Amy Jeffress and Joshua Matz, according to a CBS report. Both are partners at Hecker Fink LLP. The attorneys have in the past represented Democrat clients and taken on left-leaning cases especially those taking aim at President Donald Trump, his administration and his supporters. ILHAN OMAR’S TURBULENT WEEK EXPLAINED: THE DUELING PROBES THAT THREW THE SOMALI-BORN PROGRESSIVE INTO CHAOS Jeffress is a former federal prosecutor whose biography says she tried more than 40 cases during a decade in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District of Columbia, where she was chief of the National Security Section. She has also been a Department of Justice (DOJ) attaché. She served as former President Joe Biden’s attorney in his lawsuit against the DOJ earlier this year. In that case, Biden sought to halt the release of audio recordings between himself and his “Promise Me, Dad” book ghostwriter, Mark Zwonitzer. The audio was recorded in 2016 and 2017 and was subject to a FOIA request from the Heritage Foundation in 2024. It was cited during special counsel Robert Hur’s investigation into whether Biden illegally retained classified information from his term as vice president and piqued the interest of conservatives demanding answers about Biden’s mental acuity. The court declined to block the release of the recordings, in which Biden had frequent memory lapses, and they were made public in July. FEDERAL AGENTS SEIZE PHONE OF REP ILHAN OMAR IN RAID TIED TO IMMIGRATION FRAUD PROBE Before her time at Hecker Fink, Jeffress, a 1992 Yale Law graduate, served as counsel for then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat-led House January 6 committee, which spent two years investigating the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. She represented the committee when it was sued by a Trump campaign spokesperson, Taylor Budowich, after the committee subpoenaed his bank records. Jeffress also represented Trump foe and former FBI attorney Lisa Page, a key figure in the left’s Russiagate conspiracy theory, during congressional scrutiny into the FBI’s handling of the matter. Page later sued the DOJ for releasing her text messages with her FBI colleague and lover at the time, Peter Strzok. In the messages, Strzok assuaged Page’s concerns that Trump would become president by vowing that the FBI would stop it and referred to an “insurance policy” against his presidency. That case was settled in 2024. ILHAN OMAR’S WEALTH SCANDAL TAKES A TURN JUST ONE DAY AFTER RAID OF HER DC HOME Jeffress is married to U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper of the District of Washington, D.C., who in May ruled that it was illegal for the John F. Kennedy Performing Arts Center to add Trump’s name. Trump publicly criticized Cooper as “highly conflicted” due to his relationship with Jeffress. Matz is also a partner at Hecker Fink. He graduated from Harvard Law and clerked for former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. “Joshua’s practice has long included a focus on democracy and elections,” his biography page says. He represented the state of Pennsylvania in defending the certification of its election results, including arguing before the Supreme Court. ILHAN OMAR’S EMBATTLED HUSBAND APPEARS AT SCENE OF HSI RAID IN MIDST OF CRIMINAL FRAUD INVESTIGATION He was counsel to House Democrats during both failed impeachment attempts against Trump during his first term in office. Matz also represented E. Jean Carroll in two separate civil cases against Trump related to his denial of her sexual assault claims against him. He was never criminally charged. In 2022, Carroll accused Trump of defaming her in his denial of her account of an incident she claims happened in 1996. A New York jury found Trump liable for defamation and for sexual assault. Prior to that case, in 2019, a jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million for defamation stemming from other comments made by Trump. Matz represented students, parents and teachers who opposed Florida’s Parental Rights in Education Act, which his biography describes as the “Don’t Say Gay” law, which restricted teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity. He also successfully represented Democratic Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear when he was sued for COVID-19 lockdowns, including school closures, and victims of the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville. Now, Matz and Jeffress are representing Omar as she seeks to battle two federal probes. In a video message posted to her social media earlier this month, the lawmaker pleaded with her supporters to keep sending money, noting that her fight against the investigations would be costly. Omar’s attorneys did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. Neither did the White House.
Why the Ilhan Omar saga isn’t going away
President Donald Trump has his favorite riffs during campaign rallies. He recently complimented the physique of Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio. He still calls out former President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. But, in recent weeks, the president spun Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., into heavy rotation on his playlist. The Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department are probing Omar for alleged immigration fraud and financial disclosure reports. TRUMP SAYS ILHAN OMAR COULD GO TO JAIL OR BE DEPORTED, CALLS HER ‘A DISGRACE TO OUR COUNTRY’ “What she did was use a fake name and other things that are fake,” the president groused about Omar. “She used the fake name to be sworn in. I assume she must immediately resign from Congress.” Trump argued that Democrats “just conceded her seat.” They didn’t. And the president declared that “she will not be legally allowed to be a member of that august body of politicians.” Not accurate. The president doesn’t decide who gets to sit in Congress. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution grants that power to the House and Senate. It charges both bodies with authority to “be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.” The Constitution goes on to say that the House and Senate may “punish its Members for Disorderly Behavior; and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.” We bring up those responsibilities because it’s possible that the House may need to tangle with the “qualifications” of Omar. Especially since The New York Times reported that the Minnesota Democrat faced scrutiny by the Obama-era Justice Department in 2016. Moreover, that inquiry says the feds found evidence that she may have entered into a fraudulent marriage. If that’s the case, there could be questions about Omar’s citizenship and, thus, whether she’s even permitted to serve in Congress. Especially if it’s found she was naturalized as a citizen via bogus means. Republicans have been after Omar for years. Across the aisle, Democrats are concerned this could be a distracting headache. Especially if they seize control of the House after the midterms next week. THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO WHY REMOVING ILHAN OMAR FROM CONGRESS COULD BE HARDER THAN TRUMP EXPECTS The inquiry into Omar began in 2016 when she ran for the state legislature. Former President Barack Obama was in office. The investigation continued into the Biden administration. The feds terminated the inquiry in 2021. After the Trump administration raided Omar’s home in October — seizing electronics and documents — Obama defended the congresswoman. “It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say,” the former president said. “But that’s exactly what the Trump administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.” Obama said the current inquiry flipped her life “upside down” and characterized it as an effort to “intimidate someone.” Controversial influencer and livestreamer Hasan Piker asked Omar about how her week was going amid the investigation. “It tracks for me,” replied Omar. “That’s kind of what I’m used to.” A spokeswoman for Omar said she “has repeatedly and unequivocally denied this baseless, disgusting conspiracy theory.” But indications that Omar faced scrutiny ten years ago make it harder to characterize this as wild, right-wing conjecture emanating from the blogosphere. “Who ordered [the investigation] closed?” Fox contributor Paul Mauro asked. “Reportedly, both administrations had opened cases into this. We now know how much smoke there is.” Omar campaigned for the state legislature in 2016. Her campaign released a letter from the U.S. attorney saying it “wasn’t investigating” nor requesting an inquiry into Omar. So was she cleared? Or does word of the old probe pour petrol on the flames? “Omar will talk about it and say, ‘They’ve looked into this. Nothing came about it,’” said University of Minnesota political science professor Kathryn Pearson. “But I think it’s also a talking point that Republicans will use. So, I think sort of both sides will try to use that to their advantage.” John Nagel is Omar’s Republican opponent on the ballot next week. Nagel views the new investigation as a political wedge. “With the raid on her home, people should keep this in mind. It’s a very serious accusation,” Nagel said. “As far as I’m concerned, Somalia comes first in her life. And we are nothing more than a piggy bank for her.” TRUMP PUSH TO OUST OMAR FACES HISTORIC SUPREME COURT TEST, BUT LEGAL EXPERTS SEE ‘UNCHARTED’ TWIST At least one Republican is ready to bounce Omar from the House. “If the evidence shows that she is not an American, she has to be removed immediately and probably put in prison,” said Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla. “I think the idea that a foreigner might be actually serving in Congress should be terrifying to Americans.” But another House Republican urges caution. “We just need all the facts,” said Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J. “I hope that the investigation is thorough, fair, and absolutely aboveboard.” And then there is the question of due process. “The Ethics Committee should commence an investigation. It takes two-thirds of the House to expel a sitting member. I would highly doubt the Democrats would agree. And certainly not without findings,” Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., told Fox. “I think, at a minimum, the Ethics Committee should move forward with an investigation immediately upon our return.” This could develop into a real hornet’s nest for the House when lawmakers descend on Washington after the midterms. That’s to say nothing of questions about seating Omar when the new Congress starts in January. If Democrats win the House, would House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. — perhaps as speaker — be forced to grapple with the question of seating Omar if Republicans move to exclude her? In fact, such a motion to exclude comes right before the new speaker swears in the entire House on Jan. 3. The speaker would swear in 434 members then take votes related to the