Federal agents search Rep. Ilhan Omar's house as part of criminal investigation

[0:00] Of course, we need to let the facts of this investigation bear out, but what can you tell us so far? [0:06] Good morning. Good morning. Yeah, this is a fast-breaking story, but I've got a statement [0:10] from a DOJ official acknowledging this law enforcement activity by Homeland Security [0:15] Investigations, which is a part of DHS, in the Washington, D.C. area. This was in response to [0:20] my inquiry about what's happening at Representative Omar's home. So they're saying that this was a [0:25] judicially authorized search warrant pursued by the Department of Justice being executed by agents [0:31] of Homeland Security investigation, which is a part of DHS. And we're continuing to report this out. [0:37] Fox News is reporting that this investigation stems from a question about paperwork filled out, [0:44] immigration paperwork filled out by her father when she was a child. As everyone knows, there's [0:49] been a longstanding controversy, mostly in right-wing circles, about Ilhan Omar's immigration [0:54] provenance and whether she's in the country legally, whether the steps she took when she arrived here [1:01] as a refugee, as a child, whether all the paperwork was proper. It's been simmering in right-wing media [1:07] and conservative circles for years. But it appears that somehow the Department of Justice has secured [1:13] a warrant to conduct this search. That's a big step. That requires a judge to determine that there's [1:20] probable cause to believe that there's evidence of a crime at this location, which would be her home [1:25] in the D.C. area. It doesn't mean that it's definitive, but it means that there was enough [1:29] that they showed a judge. I mean, we saw in the past when the Justice Department secured a warrant [1:33] for the FBI to go and seize ballots in Fulton County, when we looked at the affidavit for the search [1:38] warrant, we saw that it was based largely on debunked conspiracy theories. We will not see this affidavit [1:43] for some time. Likely, it's under seal. That's the standard procedure for these kind of things. [1:48] So we don't know exactly what this is based on, what facts they have. But that's what we're being told by [1:54] officials that it's related to an immigration-related investigation and to her status in the country. [1:59] Guys. Ken, thank you, as always, for getting up to speed so quickly on this breaking news. [2:03] Jeff, you know, as Ken alluded to, a warrant was authorized by a judge. So clearly, evidence was [2:09] presented in some form or fashion to a judge, and that was granted. But can you just remind us of the [2:14] history between Ilhan Omar and President Trump and the larger Republican Party? Sure. It's not an [2:22] uplifting history. The president has also has been very critical of Omar, along with her fellow, [2:28] quote unquote, squad members over the years, starting during his first term, and has often [2:36] disparaged her and disparaged her representation from Minnesota. And I think that gives me an [2:42] opportunity to mention, again, that Ken was just talking about immigration and paperwork going back [2:47] to when she was a child that that has stirred up conspiracies in right wing circles. But let's [2:53] not forget that this is a sitting member of Congress. So that underscores how significant [2:58] this is in a moment when we don't have a whole lot of facts. I think it's important to note, again, [3:03] that she was an elected congresswoman from the state of Minnesota by her district, who the president [3:09] has clearly had as a target for some time. [3:12] As we talk, Jacob, about getting closer and closer to the midterms, I'm curious to know from you, [3:18] you know, we have seen the Trump administration be pretty open about going after perceived adversaries. [3:24] Ilhan Omar may be the next one. How does this play out with the electorate right now? [3:30] Well, it's an excellent question. And I actually was just in Ilhan Omar's district for the last couple [3:34] of days in Minneapolis. And look, I think there's still a lot that remains to be seen. We're in a [3:41] breaking news situation. And I think it's probably inappropriate to speculate too far ahead. But I do [3:47] think that there's a potential certainly in Minnesota for this to be a rallying point for [3:52] Democrats who, at least in that Senate race, have been a little bit on their back feet ever since [3:59] the fraud scandal first came to national prominence earlier this year. Look, I think there's a real [4:05] possibility that this could be a moment for Democrats to get their act together in Minnesota and [4:11] rally behind their nominee for Senate, Peggy Flanagan, their nominee for governor, Amy Klobuchar. [4:16] Of course, if this investigation proceeds and something truly damning comes out, it could have [4:20] the opposite effect here. By and large, though, I don't really think voters are looking at, you know, [4:26] 20-year-old or 30-year-old immigration paperwork as the defining issue of this midterm in Minnesota or [4:33] elsewhere. [4:33] Yeah. So the defining issue at this point, as we've seen time and time again, Susan, has been the economy, [4:39] specifically when it comes to the pressure that diesel prices and gas prices are putting on the [4:43] consumers across America. So let's start with your reaction to President Trump making this diesel deal [4:49] with Russia in the final weeks before this election. What should we glean from the deal itself, [4:54] especially given that Trump had levied tariffs at other nations that were doing business with Russia? [5:00] Yeah. I mean, not just tariffs. You know, the Congress of the United States has spoken very loudly and said [5:06] we have put sanctions on Russia as a result of its invasion of its neighbor. In fact, you know, [5:14] that law remains on the books. It's not even clear, you know, by what mechanism Donald Trump, [5:20] you know, he seems to have just issued a waiver until next spring on this Russian energy diesel fuel [5:27] coming into the United States. But I'm told that in order to do so, the law requires the president [5:34] to certify that the war is, in fact, over. Obviously, the war is not over. In fact, [5:39] both Vladimir Putin and Ukraine over the weekend have continued to exchange blows with each other, [5:49] even though Donald Trump followed up this diesel deal with Russia by claiming over the weekend that [5:55] there was an energy ceasefire that he had somehow mediated between the two. Both sides say that's not [6:00] true. And again, how is this the timing of this for Republicans seems remarkable. You're hearing [6:07] even a number of Republican members of Congress saying they don't support this. If Donald Trump [6:12] thinks that the solution politically out of the problems created by the war in the Middle East that [6:19] he provoked is to fund Russia's war with Ukraine by giving money to Russia and overriding American [6:26] sanctions, that strikes me as both politically ill-advised and also, by the way, you know, [6:31] experts suggest it's not going to make any kind of significant difference in terms of the American [6:37] economic picture. This is not a huge amount of diesel that you're talking about bringing into the [6:42] country. And with so little time left before the election, it is highly questionable whether it would [6:48] have any effect whatsoever in terms of the prices. Well, Ron, Susan teased you up just perfectly [6:54] there. You are our expert, the resident expert sitting here with me. So run us through the details [6:59] of this deal. Just give us a gut check on what's actually in it. And to Susan's point, will it help [7:03] Americans across the country as they deal with these skyrocketing prices? Not in a meaningful way to [7:08] take the last piece of that first. Diesel prices fell about 5 percent once the announcement was made. [7:12] Looks like they've stabilized. But as I double from last year, right? They're up about 85 percent. [7:17] 85 percent. But when you look around even New Jersey, where I was driving yesterday, [7:23] diesel is still well above six dollars per gallon. The funny thing about this and funny, [7:28] I mean, ironic and strange is that we produce over 5.1 million barrels of diesel per day and consume [7:36] about 4.1 million. We are a net exporter of diesel. We don't really need Russian diesel. And we're [7:44] going to do it. Strangely, a Russian tanker arrived over the weekend with 350,000 tons of diesel to the [7:52] United States. So this means the president made the announcement a couple of days ago. The tanker [7:57] was effectively already here. This deal was cut three weeks ago without informing Congress of it, [8:04] as Susan was mentioning earlier, which may very well be a violation of sanctions. Russia is a country [8:08] with which we do not do business under the OFAC rules that exist for a handful of countries that [8:15] are deemed to be adversaries of the United States. And so there are two questions. One is political. [8:21] Well, three, geopolitical and funding the war against Ukraine by allowing Russia to sell energy [8:26] exports outside the country. And then two, does it really have three? Does it really have any impact [8:32] on the American consumer? Diesel permeates the economy in ways gasoline doesn't. It shows up in [8:38] the cost of shipping. It shows up in the cost of a wide variety of different activities that take place [8:43] in our economy. And the modest reduction that we have in price probably won't be felt and probably [8:50] will have zero impact on the outcome of the midterms, if indeed that was the president's intent. [8:55] I know this is largely a geopolitical question, but also it has economic implications as well. You know, [9:00] Trump announced that energy ceasefire. It's in dispute whether or not either party is agreeing [9:05] to it between Ukraine and Russia. But Trump has essentially blamed Ukraine for the high diesel [9:12] prices, saying it's because they're targeting these energy facilities inside of Russia. [9:16] Give us a sense of whether that's true on the economic merits. [9:22] Not really. I mean, if it were true, it would be more true for Europe, which has relied on [9:27] Russian energy exports, although less so now because we're exporting natural gas and diesel [9:32] to Europe. They have shifted their dependence away from Russia when it comes to energy products. [9:38] And again, you know, choosing my words carefully, it's a stretch to say that the United States is [9:44] in any way, shape or form dependent on Russia for its energy needs. And so what's really happening [9:49] here? And as you mentioned, the ceasefire is not on at all. In fact, Russia over the last three days [9:57] has hit civilian energy infrastructure in Ukraine, so much so that there have been lights out in Kiev. [10:04] And I mean, lights out, lights out in Kiev and effects on the Kiev water supply. So this [10:10] these attacks that are ongoing, Ukraine is responding by hitting data centers in Russia, [10:16] by the way, which has cut down bot traffic in the United States rather dramatically. [10:20] This is the ceasefire doesn't exist for all intents and purposes. And again, doesn't seem [10:25] that there's going to be any material impact that American consumers will feel. So this is a [10:30] multi-layered type of issue, geopolitical, political and economic. And I don't know who it benefits [10:38] other having read papers over the weekend, anyone other than Russia by allowing them to finance their [10:44] attacks on Ukraine. Hey, it's Rachel. I am so glad to see you at the end of that clip, because this [10:49] is where I get to tell you about a new way to watch all our clips and all of our shows and everything [10:54] on MSNOW on your phone or your tablet or your laptop. You can watch things live or recorded. Plus, you [11:01] can ask me and all the other hosts and reporters questions in our weekly live chats. You can go to [11:06] ms.now slash membership or just click below. Thanks.