Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has alleged that an internal review concluded Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar married her brother, claiming the matter could ultimately put her at risk of deportation.    

“We know that she married her brother to try to bring him into the United States,” Mullin said while discussing Omar. “We know he lives now in London.”

Mullin appeared to be referring to Omar’s second husband, identified in prior Daily Mail reporting as Ahmed Elmi. Omar and Elmi were both born in Somalia.

According to an account Omar allegedly shared with friends and later relayed to the Daily Mail, she remained legally married to her first husband, Ahmed Hirsi, when she entered into the second marriage.

Omar has repeatedly rejected accusations surrounding the marriage. She has since married for a third time and is now married to political consultant Tim Mynett.

In an interview with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, Mullin described the allegations involving Omar as “possible illegal activity” and said the DHS inquiry remained underway — an unusual public disclosure about an active investigation.

“We’re investigating,” Mullin said, adding that deportation could be considered if the investigation produced grounds for it.

“There’s no expiration to that,” he said when asked about potential charges. “If we can prove it that, maybe you shouldn’t have been here in the first place, we’ll deport you.”

Mullin appeared to be alluding to potential immigration documents being falsified, which would be a deportable offense. That plan could face difficulty given Omar became a naturalized US citizen in 2000, when she was 17.

Her office did not immediately respond to the Daily Mail’s request for comment on Mullin’s latest claims. 

Abdihakim Osman, a past friend of Omar, told the Mail in 2020 that Omar said she wanted to get her brother papers so he could stay in the United States, at a time when she was married to her first husband Ahmed Hirsi.

ALSO READ: RHUGT Exclusive: Vicki Whoops It Up as Luann Interrupts

But hardly anyone realized that meant marrying him.

‘No one knew there had been a wedding until the media turned up the marriage certificate years later,’ Osman exclusively told Daily Mail at the time. 

Omar married her first husband, Hirsi, in 2002 in a Muslim ceremony that, like many in the immigrant community, was not registered with the state.

The first report that Omar and her husband were siblings appeared on the website Somalispot in 2016.

It said of Elmi: ‘As soon as Ilhan Omar married him he started university at her alma mater North Dakota State University where he graduated in 2012.’

Mullin said the investigation into Omar is apolitical despite the congresswoman being a longtime target of Trump. He’s posted about her in derogatory ways dozens of times on social media, and he’s pushed to have her investigated.  

‘When we move forward,’ Mullin said as if the case against Omar is imminent, ‘it’s not political.’

The Department of Homeland Security office did not deny Mullin’s claims that Omar did indeed marry her brother. 

‘As a matter of policy, DHS does not comment on specific investigative techniques, ongoing investigations, or potential future actions,’ a spokesperson said, seemingly coming at odds with Mullin’s disclosure. 

‘No one, including members of Congress, are above the law,’ the spokesperson added.

The Sussexes’ response to a letter from King Charles reaffirming their position as non-working royals was “utterly petty,” according to royal editor Rebecca English.

The Lord Chamberlain, the Royal Household’s most senior official, wrote and circulated the letter on the King’s behalf on Monday. It was sent to government departments, the military and lord lieutenants.

It made clear that, despite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s return to Britain, they remain “akin to private citizens with commercial and charitable interests.” Their HRH styles, the letter added, “remain in abeyance.”

Speaking on the Daily Mail’s Palace Confidential, English told host Luke Blackall that the Royal Household had made a “pretty punchy” intervention. However, she said the Sussex office’s subsequent reaction was extraordinary and appeared entitled.

“Their reaction after the letter emerged was to say, ‘We are surprised this has been done,’” English said.

“Well, actually, they first tried to say they didn’t get any notice of it at all. That is not true. They did. Then they said they didn’t get enough notice to make any amendments or clarifications.”

“The only way I can describe the reaction of their office is pettifogging and utterly petty.”

‘They issued the exact timings of this letter, that they received notification of its contents at 1.59pm… The fact they were so needled that they wanted to set out this timing, really speaks to the heart of the situation.

‘People I have spoken to were like: “This is the directive of a head of state. Not the head of a family, the head of a state. Why should these two private individuals feel that they have any bearing on what he says?”

‘There’s a lot of eyebrow raising at the fact that the Sussexes believe they should have had a chance to change what the King had written.’

RELATED: Meet Michael Polansky, Lady Gaga’s Fiancé, Now a New Dad

The Sussexes’ office was sent the contents at 1.59pm and replied twenty minutes later asking whether it had already gone out. It was released to the media at 3.06pm. Harry himself was contactable only at 3.09pm, having spent the day at a studio in London.

English went further, saying people she has spoken to feel the Sussexes’ reaction is deeply hypocritical.

‘What about Oprah? What about Spare? What about the Netflix series, what about the many interviews in which they’ve taken some really nasty pop shots at the institution as well as individual family members?’ she asked.

‘Where was the notice that the palace got on those? None.

‘I don’t think this was the palace’s intention, but a lot of people will think, the Sussexes have got a taste of their own medicine.’

The royal editor also dismantled the suggestion, briefed out by the Sussex camp, that the letter had been timed to influence an upcoming meeting of RAVEC, the Home Office committee that rules on entitlement to taxpayer-funded security.

She said the Sussexes’ claim was ‘pretty inflammatory’, given it supposes the palace would seek to sway a government committee over which it has no control.

‘I have been told [the claim] is wrong on two counts,’ English said.

‘One, the Sussexes are actually wrong about the timings of the RAVEC meeting and two, the reason why it was put out on a Monday is because it’s effectively the start of a new term for royal engagements.

‘The Sussexes have made clear they’ve got a very busy programme of their own engagements, so that they feel they needed to get the record straight before this all kicked off.’

Watch English’s full assessment of the Sussexes’ response to the King’s letter by subscribing to Palace Confidential on YouTube.

A juror who reportedly held out in the Lindsay Clancy case misrepresented himself when renting a home and has since accumulated more than $12,000 in unpaid rent, according to his landlord.

The allegations surfaced after court documents and police reports indicated that the juror had previously been accused of domestic violence and was subject to an active restraining order during Clancy’s high-profile murder trial, according to a Friday report.

The unidentified Black male juror, described as the panel’s sole holdout, rented a two-bedroom apartment in March. But he soon stopped paying the $2,400 monthly rent, the landlord told the Daily Mail.

The landlord, who requested anonymity, said he initially sought to give the tenant the benefit of the doubt after the missed payments began.

“He told me he was sorry, he was going through some stuff,” the landlord said. He added that he had owned the property for only about a year.

However, the landlord said the dispute worsened as the balance of overdue rent continued to grow.

When he attempted to contact the tenant about the arrears, the landlord said both phone numbers he had been given had been disconnected.

The landlord also alleged that the juror and his girlfriend recently installed cameras around the property and attempted to flee when he approached them in person to discuss the unpaid rent.

In the beginning, the juror allegedly claimed it would just be him on the lease, with his daughter occasionally visiting him on weekends.

But then his girlfriend or fiancée started showing up and moved in with him, added the landlord.

‘He lied about everything,’ he told the Daily Mail.

The landlord said he was forced to take the juror to court over the unpaid rent to regain access to his property, just before the Clancy trial started.

During deliberations, the landlord was awarded a default judgment of more than $12,000 in unpaid rent and plans to evict him, court records seen by the Daily Mail show.

According to his landlord, the juror is a church-going man from Haiti, who is in his 40s and works for a local pest control firm.

Neighbors speculated whether the lone juror had ‘gone into hiding’ after the intense interest in the Clancy trial, which ended last Friday in a mistrial after the holdout refused to side with his fellow jurors and acquit the former nurse.

On Friday evening, NBC10 Boston went on to reveal how the man was allegedly charged with assault in September 2021 following an incident involving his then-wife.

A police report obtained by the station said the man’s 13-year-old nephew called 911 and alleged his uncle had grabbed his wife around the throat before throwing her into a dresser.

The man’s mother was allegedly screaming, ‘You’re evil!’ as officers arrested him, according to the report cited by NBC10.

The criminal charge was ultimately dismissed, and the couple later divorced.

His ex-wife told the station that she had not wanted to testify because she feared she could lose custody of her daughter.

But the juror allegedly became embroiled in another family confrontation years later.

Last year, the same nephew who had called police during the 2021 episode obtained a restraining order against his uncle, according to NBC10.

In an affidavit, the teenager accused his uncle of knocking him to the ground and repeatedly punching him in the face.

The nephew claimed his uncle told him: ‘You ruined my f***ing life,’ in an apparent reference to his earlier decision to call police.

‘You’ve had this coming your way for a long time,’ the juror allegedly added, according to the affidavit quoted by NBC10.

The restraining order was still active when the man was chosen to sit on the Clancy jury and throughout the weeks of evidence in the explosive case, the station reported.

That revelation could prove particularly significant because Massachusetts’ standard juror questionnaire asks prospective jurors whether they have ever been arrested or charged with a crime, as well as whether they have been served with a court order.

NBC10 Boston chief legal analyst Michael Coyne questioned how the juror could have remained on the panel if all of the relevant information had been disclosed.

‘I don’t see how they would’ve allowed him to be a member of this jury,’ Coyne told the station. ‘I don’t see how, if those questions had been answered correctly, one side or the other would’ve taken the chance with allowing him to be seated.’

RELATED: BBC Star Shares Emotional Statement After Announcing Her Role Has Been Cut

It is not publicly known what answers the juror actually gave.

Juror questionnaires are not public records, and the Boston station said it had been unable to determine whether his questionnaire still exists following the mistrial.

Coyne said prosecutors may now need to investigate what was disclosed during jury selection.

‘It is, in fact, a crime not to do so,’ he said of answering the questionnaire truthfully.

A spokesperson for Kevin Reddington, Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer, told the Daily Mail he had no comment when asked about new information regarding the holdout juror and whether he is looking into whether or not the juror was truthful about the details in his jury questionnaire.

The Daily Mail has also contacted the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office and the Plymouth Superior Court for comment.

Family members contacted by NBC10 said they had been estranged from him since the alleged confrontation with his nephew and claimed they had no idea he had been serving on the Clancy jury.

One relative went further, describing him to the station as a ‘narcissist’ and saying she did not believe he should have been allowed to serve on such a consequential case.

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, had been accused of killing her three young children at the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. 

Her defense centered heavily on her mental state at the time of the killings.

After the mistrial, other members of the jury publicly described an extraordinary breakdown inside the deliberation room.

They said 11 jurors favored acquitting Clancy, while the lone holdout refused to join them.

Several jurors subsequently accused him of refusing to meaningfully engage with their arguments, with some describing him as ‘arrogant.’

One juror called his behavior ‘shocking.’

Clancy juror Paula Devlin, 65, who appeared on CBS Mornings to discuss the case earlier Friday, told the Daily Mail that the holdout juror made ‘no sense’ when pressed on his reasons for his vote and was ‘quiet’ for most of the week-long deliberations.

He was more focused on policing the tenor of the group’s discussions than offering explanations for his conviction that Clancy was guilty, she said.

‘The main thing he focused on is sometimes we would all want to talk at once, and that was very upsetting to him.

‘He would get upset and say, ”Listen to what she’s saying, listen to what he’s saying, be respectful’.”

‘We were trying to say to him, that sometimes somebody says something and they get lost in their thought or they can’t find the right word, and somebody else puts that word in there for them or finishes their thought, that’s how normal conversation works.

‘But when that would happen, he would get upset and just take all this time lecturing us about not being respectful.’

Devlin also claimed the holdout was a married man and rarely fraternized with the group during the trial, instead preferring to speak to his wife or watch videos on his phone.

Devlin said the 11 jurors who decided Clancy was not guilty of murder or manslaughter in the deaths of her kids felt ‘defeat’ and ‘anger’ when the mistrial was declared.

She told the Daily Mail: ‘I don’t want to bash anybody, even that person.

‘They did whatever they did for their reasons, and we will never know, and we will never understand.

‘That’s what hurts so much.’

Three other women who served as jurors also spoke out earlier this week. 

‘We weren’t trying to figure out if she murdered the children, she did and she’s admitting to that. We’re trying to figure out: Did she know right from wrong at that time?’ jury foreperson Roni Carlson recounted to NBC Boston.

‘And with everybody saying she loved her children so much and everything proved she loved her children, from her journals to her mother-in-law, everything proved that she loved her children,’ Carlson continued. ‘So she had to have snapped.’

‘He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt,’ Carlson said.

‘I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and then he said, “But I’m still not going to say she’s not guilty.”‘

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has drawn criticism after launching an unusually personal attack on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s late mother over her decades in public housing.

Mr Albanese was raised in social housing in Camperdown, in Sydney’s inner west. His mother, Maryanne, received a disability pension due to chronic arthritis and remained in the home until she died from a brain aneurysm in 2002, aged 65.

The Prime Minister has often discussed his childhood, including the lengthy periods his mother spent in hospital. He has said she was “left behind” by health funding cuts and lived with fears that their council home could be taken away.

Comments from earlier this year have now resurfaced, showing Ms Hanson sharply criticising Mr Albanese’s accounts of his upbringing and questioning why his mother spent so many years in housing commission accommodation.

“Housing commission houses should not be there for people to live in them for 30, 40 (years) – and he said his mother lived in the same one she was born in for 65 years,” she told The Karl Stefanovic Show.

“Sorry, that is not on, to me. It should be limited time; you have been given a hand up, move it on to the next ones coming through.”

During the interview, the One Nation leader mimicked Mr Albanese’s comments about being raised in council housing while pretending to cry. On Friday, she reaffirmed her stance.

“The Prime Minister complains about his housing commission upbringing,” she told The Australian newspaper.

‘How does he compare that to the Australians being forced to live in cars and tents because of his government’s high immigration numbers?’

During the interview, Hanson said she had grown up on a street with housing commission properties.

‘It was a helping hand to those people, but they had jobs. And they worked,’ she added. 

Hanson’s comments sparked a furious response from Energy Minister Chris Bowen when he was asked about her Stefanovic appearance on Saturday.

‘Some things are off limits. Attacking a woman who’s been dead for more than 20 years for living in public housing is off limits,’ he said.

‘For God’s sake, there’s a line and Pauline Hanson regularly crosses the line. This is an outrageous attack on a woman who is not here to give her perspective. 

‘The Prime Minister’s mum died more than 20 years ago, so keep the Prime Minister’s mum out of it. Keep families out of it.’

Bowen then claimed her comments about Albanese’s mother were indicative of her opinion on Australians living in public housing.

‘Pauline Hanson pretends to be a friend of the battler, with all the battlers living in public housing around Australia,’ he said.

‘She’s just told you what she thinks of you, if you’ve been living in public housing for a long time. She thinks you shouldn’t be there.’

The Daily Mail has contacted the office of the Prime Minister for comment.

Albanese posted a tribute to his mother in 2021, referencing her struggles, including how rheumatoid arthritis crippled her joints and prevented her from working. 

‘She lived on a disability pension… Life wasn’t easy and her health made things even harder – but we got through because of her,’ he said.

‘We lived in council housing, which gave us a sense of security and stability. It was our home. Truth is, mum was left behind – by people who counted her out and by governments who cut back support.

‘The cutbacks that happened in mum’s lifetime meant she had to justify the support she was receiving. When health funding was cut, the quality of mum’s care was cut too.

‘And when they tried to sell our council house, it felt like our home was being taken from us.’

Hanson’s comments about Albanese come after a media firestorm about her party’s criticism of Liberal frontbencher and former SAS member Andrew Hastie.

A satirical cartoon on Hanson’s social media account labelled Hastie a traitor several times, which he called a ‘massive slur’ on veterans across the country.

The tension between Hastie and Hanson stems from his testimony during the defamation trial of accused war criminal Ben Roberts-Smith, with whom Hastie served in the SAS. 

Members of the Liberals, Labor and the Greens as well as independent politicians have spoken out against the cartoon, and Bowen took the opportunity to criticise One Nation further on Saturday.

‘Is there anyone Pauline Hanson won’t attack? She’s been attacking Andrew Hastie this week, who is a decorated war veteran,’ he said.

‘I have plenty of disagreements with Andrew Hastie, obviously, but I honour his service to our country. He should not be attacked in this way.’

The energy minister used his defence of Hastie to take aim at One Nation’s continued exclusion of some media, including the ABC. 

‘Ultimately, Andrew Hastie showed the bravery to go to Afghanistan in a uniform,’ Bowen said.

‘Pauline Hanson doesn’t have the bravery to stand in front of a TV camera if an ABC journalist is present. So Pauline Hanson is not in any position to lecture anyone else about bravery or our country.’

– READ MORE: Furious Liberal Andrew Hastie declares war on Pauline Hanson as he claims he was called a traitor: ‘Lying cowards’

– READ MORE: Anthony Albanese shares throwback photo in public housing with his single mum in a bid to PROVE he knows how hard life can be for the average Joe