Hasan Piker Says CNN Is 'Not Providing Sufficient Defense' of Ilhan Omar
The streamer said the network would be "going crazy" and calling it "Obama level birtherism" if any other member of Congress were targeted.
Streamer Hasan Piker faulted CNN for its coverage of the federal investigation into Representative Ilhan Omar. On an episode of HasanAbi, he said the network is "not providing sufficient defense" of the Minnesota Democrat as federal investigators examine her citizenship paperwork.
The criticism comes as Omar runs for reelection while facing two federal inquiries. Federal agents searched her Washington home on Monday. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro has also said that Omar's financial disclosures are the subject of an investigation.
"I'm curious. How is CNN been covering this? Have they leaned into it? I mean, they're not they're not providing sufficient defense," Piker said. "If it was any other Congress person, they would be going crazy over it."
He said the network would otherwise be calling it "Obama level birtherism," and added: "They're not really coming to the defense of the truth at all."
Hasan Piker's Jab at Jake Tapper
Later in the episode, Piker asked viewers to remember "Jake Tapper and other fellow Democrats" and what he described as their role in "demonizing" Omar, which he said set her up "for people like Trump to think she won't be defended." Tapper is a CNN journalist, not a Democratic officeholder. Piker then aimed a one-liner at the CNN anchor: "Yeah, I just don't think Jake Tapper will be a part of that defense."
Piker called the probe "political theater" and said that, at worst, the case involves "a clerical error being represented as like the worst crime of all time." He also argued that if Omar had been 18 rather than 17, "she would have become a naturalized citizen regardless after five years of having her green card." Coverage Piker read on air put it more cautiously. Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge and a resident fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, said that if Omar was 18 at the time, she may have been able to apply for citizenship on her own after holding a valid green card for five years.
What the Ilhan Omar Investigation Is About
Investigators are examining whether Omar or her father misstated her birth date so she could derive citizenship through him as a minor when he was naturalized in 2000, the Washington Post reported. The Post also reported that the immigration inquiry was launched earlier this year, several years after DHS had declined to move forward on similar allegations. Omar has denied wrongdoing and has called the search "political intimidation."
The dispute over her birth year dates to 2019. That year, her staff asked the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library to change her listed birth year from 1981 to 1982. The library's director later said the 1981 date had not come from a birth certificate.
Magistrate Judge Matthew Sharbaugh limited how prosecutors could access the records seized in the search and required a screening process to protect Omar's legislative work under the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause, CNN reported in a story Piker read on air. Agents also seized her phone and subpoenaed family members, NBC News reported.
| Claim or issue | What the record shows |
|---|---|
| Omar could be stripped of citizenship | The Migration Policy Institute counted an average of 11 denaturalization cases filed per year from 1990 to 2017, a figure Piker read on air |
| Standard of proof | Civil cases require clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence, and criminal cases require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, according to Time coverage Piker read on air. In criminal cases, the illegal act must also have played a role in obtaining citizenship (Maslenjak v. United States, 2017) |
| Financial disclosures | The House watchdog recommended last month that the ethics committee dismiss misconduct allegations over the disclosures. Pirro says her office is still investigating |
The Timing Question
Piker said the case was brought "two weeks out" from the election. The search took place 22 days before the November 3 vote, and a Fox News clip played in the episode said "three weeks."
The Justice Department's election-year guidance discourages overt steps in politically sensitive cases close to an election. The so-called 60-day rule is an internal norm, not a law, and former prosecutor Abhishek Kambil told Fox News that it is not a formal ban.
On the financial inquiry, Piker said the jump in Omar's reported wealth came because "she just married a rich dude." Her original disclosure listed household assets of $6 million to $30 million, mostly tied to her husband Tim Mynett's businesses. She later amended it to $18,000 to $95,000, citing accounting errors.
What Happens Next
No charges have been filed, and any denaturalization case would have to go before a federal judge. Pirro said her office will follow the facts "wherever they take us," regardless of what the House does.
Sources
- Feds seized Rep. Ilhan Omar's phone, subpoenaed family members in immigration status probe — Phone seizure and subpoenas to relatives
- Maslenjak v. United States (2017) — Supreme Court's limit on criminal denaturalization
- Prosecutors say 60-day rule isn't a formal ban in Ilhan Omar raid — Opposing view on the DOJ pre-election norm