A watchdog organization that brought a complaint against Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is urging the House Ethics Committee to obtain her financial records instead of allowing a closely watched inquiry to fade away.
The renewed demand follows a congressional panel’s recommendation to end its review of dramatic changes in Omar’s reported wealth, which her office attributed to an accounting error.
Paul Kamenar of the National Legal and Policy Center said it was “stunning” that the Office of Congressional Conduct voted 5-1 to recommend closing the investigation. Omar’s office had highlighted the panel’s “overwhelming” decision after the vote.
“From day one, we have been clear: the Congresswoman is not a millionaire,” spokeswoman Jacklyn Rogers said after The Wall Street Journal reported that the advisory body had cleared Omar of wrongdoing.
Kamenar rejected that explanation, telling The Post that Omar’s claim that an accountant valued assets without accounting for liabilities was “laughable.”
In one of the rare public explanations of the sharp differences between her legally required financial disclosures, Omar’s office said she “isn’t involved in her husband’s businesses and trusted the accountant involved.” Omar personally signed her 2024 disclosure before amending it the following year after a series of reports by The Post.
The statement was provided to The Wall Street Journal after the newspaper reported that the Office of Congressional Conduct had advised the House Ethics Committee to dismiss the allegations against her.
The office concluded that “there is not substantial reason to believe that Rep. Omar reported false or incomplete information in her financial disclosures.” The finding followed a filing in which Omar reported as much as $30 million in assets, followed by a subsequent disclosure listing less than $100,000. Her latest filing also reported that her husband earned as little as $200 from the winery business and Rose Lake Capital venture capital firm.
The OCC, whose recommendations to the Ethics Committee are not binding, did not provide a detailed explanation for the enormous difference in Omar’s reported wealth, which was disclosed using broad financial ranges.
The decision became public shortly after the start of a 60-day blackout period on Sept. 4. During that window, the Ethics Committee is prohibited from opening an investigation near an upcoming election.
Kamenar also criticized Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the term-limited chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Comer previously told The Post that he was considering subpoenaing Omar’s husband, Tim Mynett, whose companies were tied to the temporary increase in reported assets, but later stepped back and left the matter to the Ethics Committee.
“Comer seemed to drop the ball on his committee’s investigation of her husband, who is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Ethics Committee,” Kamenar said.
“The House Oversight Committee referred the matter months ago to the House Ethics Committee and encouraged it to do its job and review the concerning allegations,” said a House Oversight Committee spokeswoman.
An OCC spokesman wouldn’t comment on specifics of the matter, citing internal rules, but noted that “The Committee on Ethics is never bound by any recommendation from OCC.” That means it is up to the panel, which is evenly divided with three Republicans and three Democrats, on whether to go forward if it wants to act after the elections.
