The office of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., on Friday called a GOP-led investigation into her family’s finances a «stunt,» one day after a House deadline for her husband to turn over records tied to his companies’ rapid growth.

The House Oversight Committee had set Feb. 19 as a deadline for Tim Mynett, Omar’s husband, to provide information about the sudden success of two of his companies to the House Oversight Committee.

«This is all a political stunt. These sham accusations were referred to the Ethics Committee, and our office has not received any follow-up because this is a baseless, headline-generating speculation and a politically targeted attack on the Congresswoman,» a spokesperson for Omar told Fox News Digital.

Omar’s office declined to say whether it had submitted the business records as requested by lawmakers.

CONGRESS OPENS ‘INDUSTRIAL-SCALE FRAUD’ PROBE IN MINNESOTA, WARNS WALZ DEMANDS ARE ‘JUST THE BEGINNING’

eStCru LLC, a winery, and Rose Lake Capital LLC, a consulting firm, both owned partially by Mynett, increased sharply in reported value between 2023 and 2024, drawing questions from lawmakers about the source of the pair’s wealth.

In just one year, the two companies added roughly $30 million in combined value.

The Oversight Committee, led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., asked Mynett to produce communications regarding the companies’ latest audits and with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), correspondence with any other federal agencies, and travel records to or from the United Arab Emirates, Somalia or Kenya.

Omar’s office called the probe a GOP-led distraction from other hot-topic issues.

«If Republicans were interested in real oversight, they would be looking at Trump and his family enriching their net worth by billions of dollars, as well as their connections to their pedophile friend, Jeffrey Epstein,» Omar’s spokesperson said.

MINNESOTA GOV WALZ, AG ELLISON TO TESTIFY IN HOUSE INVESTIGATION INTO ALLEGED $9B WELFARE FRAUD

President Donald Trump pushed for a financial investigation into Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar in January. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

When asked if Omar and Mynett had turned in the requested documentation, a spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee told Fox News Digital that the committee has referred the matter to the House Ethics Committee, the body tasked with investigating financial disclosure statements and member misconduct.

«Americans have concerns about Rep. Omar’s skyrocketing wealth while in public office. The House Oversight Committee initiated a probe into these concerns and has asked the House Ethics Committee to do its job and review this matter,» a spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee told Fox News Digital.

In its letter to Mynett sent earlier this year, the Oversight Committee said it needed the business details to ensure Omar wasn’t being unduly influenced by her husband’s success.

MASSIVE MINNESOTA FRAUD CASE PUTS AG KEITH ELLISON UNDER MICROSCOPE AS CLIMATE TIES RESURFACE

Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., left, pictured alongside Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., right. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images; Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

«Financial disclosure forms, filed by your wife, Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, show eStCru LLC and Rose Lake Capital LLC, which you hold ownership stakes in, went from being worth as much as $51,000 in 2023 to as much as $30 million in 2024,» the committee wrote.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«Given that these companies do not publicly list their investors or where their money comes from, this sudden jump in value raises concerns that unknown individuals may be investing to gain influence with your wife,» the Oversight Committee added.

The House Ethics Committee declined to comment on whether it would open a probe into Omar or her husband.

President Trump said in June he would decide «within the next two weeks» whether to strike Iran. He made the decision two days later.

On Thursday, he gave Tehran another clock, saying the Islamic Republic has 10 to 15 days to come to the negotiating table or face consequences.

The compressed timeline now sits at the center of a new round of high-stakes nuclear diplomacy. But with Trump, deadlines can serve as both warning and weapon.

Jason Brodsky, policy director at United Against Nuclear Iran, told Fox News Digital, «The Iranian regime has been operating under a grand delusion that they can turn President Trump into President Obama and President Trump has made it clear that that’s not happening.»

TRUMP MEETS NETANYAHU, SAYS HE WANTS IRAN DEAL BUT REMINDS TEHRAN OF ‘MIDNIGHT HAMMER’ OPERATION

Brodsky said there is little expectation inside the administration that diplomacy will produce a breakthrough. «I think there’s deep skepticism in the Trump administration that this negotiation is going to produce any acceptable outcome.»

Instead, he said, the talks may be serving a dual purpose. «They’re using the diplomatic process to sharpen the choices of the Iranian leadership and to buy time to make sure that we have the appropriate military assets in the region.»

A Middle Eastern source with knowledge of the negotiations told Fox News Digital that Tehran understands how close the risk of war feels and is unlikely to deliberately provoke Trump at this stage.

However, the source said Iran cannot accept limitations on its short-range missile program, describing the issue as a firm red line set by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Iranian negotiators are not authorized to cross that boundary, and conceding on missiles would be viewed internally as equivalent to losing a war.

The source indicated there may be more flexibility around uranium enrichment parameters if sanctions relief is part of the equation.

According to Brodsky, Iran’s core positions remain unchanged. «They’re trying to engage in a lot of distraction… shiny objects, to distract from the fact that they’re not prepared to make the concessions that President Trump is requiring of them,» he said. «The Iranian positions do not change and have not changed fundamentally. They refuse to accept President Trump’s position on zero enrichment. They refuse to dismantle their nuclear infrastructure. They refuse limitations on Iran’s missile program, and they refuse to end support for terror groups.»

VANCE WARNS IRAN THAT ‘ANOTHER OPTION ON THE TABLE’ IF NUCLEAR DEAL NOT REACHED

USS Gerald R. Ford pictured in the Mediterranean Sea.  (U.S Naval Forces Central Command / U.S. 6th Fleet / Handout via Reuters)

Behnam Taleblu, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, warned that Tehran may be preparing a different kind of proposal altogether.

«The first kind of deal that we have to be worried about… they may pitch an agreement that is based more on transposing the current reality onto paper… these kinds of agreements are more like understandings,» Taleblu said.

«You take the present reality, and you transpose that onto paper, and then you make the U.S. pay for something it already achieved.»

Taleblu outlined what he sees as Tehran’s strategic objectives. «The Iranians want three things, essentially. The first is they want to deter and prevent a strike.»

«The second is that they are actually using negotiations… to take the wind out of the wings of Iranian dissidents. And then the third is… they actually do want some kind of foreign financial stabilization and sanctions relief.»

«What the Iranians want is to play for time… an agreement like this doesn’t really require the Iranians to offer anything.»

RETIRED GENERAL ARGUES MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRAN IS ‘BEST OPTION’ AS TRUMP FACES ‘HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY’

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pictured  sitting next to senior military official in Iran. (Getty Images)

At the same time, Taleblu said the administration’s intentions remain deliberately opaque. «It’s hard to read the tea leaves of the administration here. Obviously, they don’t want a nuclear Iran, but also obviously they don’t want a long war in the Middle East.»

«The military architecture they’re moving into the region is signaling that they’re prepared to engage in one anyway. The question that the administration has not resolved politically… is: What is the political end state of the strikes? That’s the cultivation of ambiguity that the president excels at.»

Jacob Olidort, Chief Research Officer and Director of American Security at the America First Policy Institute, told Fox News Digital, «The President has been clear that he wants to give diplomacy a chance. However, if, in his estimation, diplomatic efforts prove unsuccessful, he will almost certainly turn to military options. What is rightfully unpredictable is the specific objective and scope of military action the President may take.»

«Specifically, will military action serve as a new layer of diplomatic pressure towards creating a new opportunity to make Iran agree to our demands — military force as coercive diplomacy — or simply achieve the intended objectives that diplomacy could not? Regardless, the President has a record of taking bold action to protect the American people from Iran’s threats.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Iranians gather while blocking a street during a protest in Tehran, Iran on Jan. 9, 2026.   (MAHSA / Middle East Images / AFP via Getty Images)

Public sentiment inside Iran remains deeply divided, Iranian sources told Fox News Digital. Many view a foreign military invasion as unacceptable, while anger over the killing of young protesters continues to fuel domestic tensions and uncertainty.

With a 10 to 15-day window ticking, Trump’s deadline may function less as a calendar marker and more as leverage.

El presidente estadounidense Donald Trump anunció la imposición de un nuevo arancel general del 10% sobre todas las importaciones y cuestionó con dureza a la Corte Suprema de EE.UU., luego de que el máximo tribunal del país declarara ilegal su política de gravámenes aplicada bajo una ley de emergencia nacional.

En una rueda de prensa, Trump calificó el fallo como “profundamente decepcionante” y afirmó sentirse “absolutamente avergonzado” por “ciertos miembros” de la Corte —de mayoría conservadora— que votaron en su contra.

Además, sostuvo que el alto tribunal está influido por “intereses extranjeros”, una acusación que elevó aún más la tensión institucional tras la sentencia.

Leé también: La Corte Suprema de EE.UU. falló en contra de los aranceles que impuso Donald Trump

Pese al revés judicial, el mandatario adelantó que avanzará con “alternativas” para sostener su estrategia comercial y defendió el uso de los aranceles como una herramienta clave de presión económica y diplomática. En ese marco, buscó llevar tranquilidad sobre el futuro de los acuerdos comerciales vigentes y aseguró que la decisión judicial no los invalida.

El fallo de la Corte Suprema, adoptado por seis votos contra tres, determinó que Trump excedió su autoridad al imponer gravámenes amparado en la Ley de Poderes Económicos de Emergencia Internacional. Según el tribunal, esa norma no autoriza al presidente a fijar derechos de aduana, una potestad que corresponde exclusivamente al Congreso.

“El presidente se arroga la facultad extraordinaria de imponer unilateralmente gravámenes de monto, duración y alcance ilimitados”, escribió el presidente del tribunal, John Roberts, al fundamentar la decisión. La Corte subrayó además que la administración Trump no logró señalar ninguna ley en la que el Congreso hubiera autorizado expresamente el uso de la IEEPA para ese fin.

La sentencia se refiere a los gravámenes presentados como “recíprocos”, aunque no alcanza a los aplicados a sectores específicos como el automotriz ni a los del acero y el aluminio.

Leé también: Juicio por YPF: un tribunal de EE.UU. rechazó frenar el proceso previo a los embargos

Durante su primer mandato (2017-2021), Trump ya había utilizado este tipo de medidas como palanca de negociación. Tras regresar al poder en enero de 2025, anunció que recurriría nuevamente a la IEEPA para imponer gravámenes generalizados a la mayoría de los socios comerciales de Estados Unidos, además de tarifas especiales a países como México, Canadá y China por cuestiones vinculadas al narcotráfico y la inmigración.

La decisión del máximo tribunal confirma fallos previos de instancias inferiores que habían declarado ilegales esas medidas. En mayo, un tribunal comercial de primera instancia ya había bloqueado la entrada en vigor de la mayoría de los gravámenes, aunque el fallo quedó en suspenso mientras avanzaba la apelación del gobierno.

Con la resolución definitiva, las empresas que pagaron esos gravámenes podrán solicitar reembolsos al Departamento del Tesoro. Según estimaciones de economistas de la Universidad de Pennsylvania-Wharton, más de 175.000 millones de dólares en ingresos podrían tener que ser devueltos, en medio de cientos de demandas ya iniciadas contra el Estado.

En paralelo, Trump sostuvo que la mayoría de los acuerdos comerciales negociados por Estados Unidos continúan vigentes pese al fallo judicial. “El acuerdo con India sigue siendo válido”, afirmó durante la conferencia de prensa, y remarcó que “todos los acuerdos” siguen en pie. “Simplemente lo haremos de otra manera”, añadió, tras reiterar que avanzará con el nuevo arancel general del 10%.

El presidente también aludió a la renegociación del tratado de libre comercio entre Estados Unidos, Canadá y México, que deberá concluir en julio de este año. El acuerdo —vigente desde 1994— fue escenario de fuertes tensiones en los últimos años a raíz de la política arancelaria impulsada por la Casa Blanca.

Washington, además, negoció un acuerdo provisional con la Unión Europea para desactivar una crisis comercial de gran escala provocada por la imposición de gravámenes entre ambos socios.

(Con información de AFP)