House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      House to vote on impeaching Biden’s homeland security secretary

      by

      House Republicans cleared the way on Tuesday for a vote to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, as Democrats denounced the move as a purely partisan exercise meant to boost the electoral prospects of Donald Trump.The historic vote, scheduled for early evening, would mark the first time since 1876 that the House has impeached a cabinet official, but with hours to go before a scheduled evening vote its prospects were unclear. But Democrats have retorted that Republicans were abusing the impeachment process to attack one of Joe Biden’s cabinet members during a crucial election year, in which immigration may play a key role.With Republicans in control of the House by a whisker-thin margin, and Democrats uniformly opposed, they can afford only a few defections. Two Republicans have already announced their opposition and a handful more appeared undecided as the House proceeded to debate the charges against Mayorkas.Congressman Ken Buck, a Republican of Colorado who declared himself solidly opposed to the impeachment effort, said the accusations leveled against Mayorkas amounted to a “policy difference”, not an impeachable offense.“If we start going down this path of impeachment with a cabinet official, we are opening a door as Republicans that we don’t want to open,” Buck said on MSNBC shortly before the afternoon vote.Republicans are seeking to impeach Mayorkas on charges that he willfully refused to enforce immigration law and breached the public trust, overriding the objections of legal experts, including some prominent conservatives, who say they have failed to produce compelling evidence that the cabinet secretary had committed high crimes and misdemeanors.“I respect everybody’s view on it,” House speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. “I understand the heavy weight that impeachment is.”He described impeachment as an “extreme measure”, but said that “extreme times call for extreme measures.”During the floor debate on Tuesday, Republicans leveled broad accusations that Mayorkas had mismanaged oversight of the US-Mexico border, where arrests for illegal crossings have reached record highs.“The constituents I represent do not understand why Texas has had to endure basically an invasion during the tenure of the secretary of Homeland Security,” Congressman Michael Burgess, Republican of Texas, said in floor remarks ahead of the procedural vote. “What are we left to do?”A Harvard-Harris survey conducted this month showed that immigration is now an important concern for voters, with 35% of respondents citing the issue as their top priority. But Democrats say that the Republican impeachment effort is a political stunt rather than meaningful reform.“Do we have a problem at the border? Absolutely,” said Democratic congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts. But, he said: “It’s clear that this is not about Secretary Mayorkas or a high crime and misdemeanor. It is about a policy disagreement with President Biden.”Trump has made the “crisis” at the border a focus of his presidential campaign and celebrated Republicans for impeaching Mayorkas on very shaky grounds.Meanwhile, Republicans barreled toward a vote as a border deal recently brokered by the Biden administration and a bipartisan group of senators appeared to be on the brink of collapse. After months of painstaking negotiations, Senate Republicans appear ready to oppose the agreement, all but ensuring it will fall short of the 60 votes needed to pass legislation in the chamber.In the event it does pass the Senate, Johnson has described it as an inadequate response to the situation at the border and has declared the deal will be “dead on arrival” in the lower chamber.House Republicans’ opposition to the bipartisan proposal and their support of Mayorkas’s impeachment sparked accusations of hypocrisy among Democrats, who argued their colleagues were uninterested in substantive changes to immigration policy even as they expressed outrage over the situation at the border.The impeachment of Mayorkas has attracted notable criticism from conservatives, including in an op-ed by the Wall Street Journal editorial board that was frequently cited by Democrats on Tuesday.“As much as we share the frustration with the Biden border mess, impeaching Mr Mayorkas won’t change enforcement policy and is a bad precedent that will open the gates to more cabinet impeachments by both parties,” the board wrote in an editorial published on Tuesday. “Grandstanding is easier than governing, and Republicans have to decide whether to accomplish anything other than impeaching Democrats.” More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Show a little courage’: Biden attacks Republicans for ‘caving’ to Trump on US-Mexico border security bill

      by

      Joe Biden urged Congress to pass the bipartisan border bill in a pointed speech on Tuesday, accusing Republicans of “caving” in to Donald Trump’s demands to block the legislation from advancing.“All indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump thinks it’s bad for him politically,” Biden said at the White House. “He’d rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it.”With an eye toward the presidential race, Trump has attacked the bipartisan deal on Truth Social as “nothing more than a highly sophisticated trap for Republicans to assume the blame on what the Radical Left Democrats have done to our Border, just in time for our most important EVER Election”.As of Tuesday afternoon, it appeared that more than 20 Republican senators were prepared to oppose the border bill, raising serious doubts about its passage.In his speech, Biden pledged he would make sure that Republicans received the blame if the bill does not pass, indicating he would spotlight the issue on the campaign trail.“The American people are going to know why it failed. I’ll be taking this issue to the country,” Biden said. “Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his Maga [‘Make America Great Again’] Republican friends. It’s time for Republicans in the Congress to show a little courage, to show a little spine, to make it clear to the American people that you work for them – not for anyone else.”Biden’s remarks came one day before the Senate is expected to hold a procedural vote on advancing the border bill, which will require 60 “yes” votes to receive approval. But even the bill’s greatest proponents have expressed doubts that it can advance.“I would anticipate Wednesday, the cloture vote does not pass,” Senator James Lankford, a Republican of Oklahoma who helped broker the deal, told reporters after a conference meeting on Monday. “People are saying, ‘Hey, I need a lot more time to be able to go through this.’”A number of senators have already indicated they will not support the bill. Hard-right Republicans argue that it does not go far enough to address the situation at the US-Mexican border, where arrests for illegal crossings have hit record highs.“The border deal is even worse than we thought,” Senator Mike Lee, a Republican of Utah, said on Sunday. “No one who cares about our border security should support it. It is a betrayal of the American people.”But progressive Democrats insist the bill, which has been described as the most severe set of changes to border policy in decades, is far too restrictive. Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat of California and chair of the Senate judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety, said on Monday that the bill amounted to “dismantling our asylum system while ultimately failing to alleviate the challenges at our border”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe $118bn bill would grant the president a new power to shut down the border when daily crossings pass a certain limit while also expediting the asylum review process, which could lead to a quicker deportation for many migrants. The bill would also provide $60bn in military assistance for Ukraine, $14bn in security assistance for Israel, and $10bn in humanitarian assistance for civilians affected by war in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank.Supporters of the bill have framed the legislation as vital for those US allies abroad, warning colleagues that inaction could trigger disastrous consequences around the world.“If we fail the Ukrainian people, then Vladimir Putin will likely succeed in his invasion of Ukraine. Putin will be emboldened, and western democracy will face the greatest threat it has seen in decades,” the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat of New York, said on Monday.But that argument has failed to sway the bill’s Republican critics, many of whom already oppose sending more money to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson of Louisiana, is moving forward on Tuesday with a planned vote on a standalone bill to provide aid to Israel, but Biden has already threatened to veto that proposal.“It’s time to stop playing games with the world waiting and watching. And by the way, the world is waiting. The world is watching,” Biden said on Tuesday. “They are waiting to watch what we’re going to do. We cannot we can’t continue to let petty partisan politics get in the way of responsibility. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Threatens to Veto Bill That Would Help Israel but Not Ukraine

      by

      President Biden accused Republicans in the House of a “cynical political maneuver” intended to kill broader legislation that would also provide money for the southern border.President Biden vowed on Monday to veto a House Republican bill that would provide $17.6 billion in aid to Israel, calling it a “cynical political maneuver” intended to hurt the chances of passage for broader legislation that would provide money for Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan and the U.S. border.House Republicans fiercely oppose the larger bill, which was unveiled by a small, bipartisan group of senators over the weekend. It calls for $118.3 billion in spending and would overhaul some of the nation’s immigration laws to deal with recent surges of migrants at the southern border.Speaker Mike Johnson said on Saturday that Republicans would instead offer the Israel-only funding bill instead.In its official response on Monday, the Biden administration said the president would veto the House bill if it came to his desk.“The administration strongly opposes this ploy, which does nothing to secure the border, does nothing to help the people of Ukraine defend themselves against Putin’s aggression, fails to support the security of American synagogues, mosques and vulnerable places of worship, and denies humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians, the majority of whom are women and children,” the White House’s Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.Mr. Johnson called Mr. Biden’s veto threat an “act of betrayal” toward Israel.“Israel is at war, fighting for its very right to exist, while our brave men and women in uniform are in harm’s way on his orders to deter Iran,” Mr. Johnson said. “In threatening to veto aid to Israel and to our military forces, President Biden is abandoning our ally in its time of greatest need. I urge friends of Israel and opponents of Iran to call the president’s bluff and pass this clean aid package.”If neither bill passes, Mr. Biden will be forced to find a new approach to supporting Israel’s war against Hamas, the armed group in Gaza that launched a terrorist attack inside Israel on Oct. 7 that killed about 1,200 people.Israel has traditionally been one of the largest recipients of foreign aid from the United States, and support for that aid has generally been supported by majorities in both parties. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden would veto standalone Israel aid bill backed by GOP, says White House

      by

      Joe Biden’s administration said on Monday he would veto a standalone bill backed by House of Representatives Republicans that would provide aid to Israel, as it backs a broader bill providing assistance to Ukraine and Israel and providing new funds for border security.“The Administration strongly encourages both chambers of the Congress to reject this political ploy and instead quickly send the bipartisan Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act to the President’s desk,” the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.Officials from the Democratic president’s administration have been working for months with Senate Democrats and Republicans on a $118bn legislation package revealed on Sunday combining billions of dollars in emergency aid for Ukraine, Israel and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, with an overhaul of US immigration policy.The bill includes $60bn in aid to Ukraine, $14.1bn for Israel in its war in Gaza, and about $20bn for new enforcement efforts along the US-Mexico border.Republican House leaders said days before its release on Sunday night that they would reject the bipartisan Senate bill, and instead vote on a bill providing aid only to Israel.The bill represented a rightward tilt in Senate negotiations over border measures, yet the backlash was intense from conservatives. They savaged the border policy proposal as insufficient, with Donald Trump leading the charge.“This is a gift to the Democrats. And this sort of is a shifting of the worst border in history onto the shoulders of Republicans,” the former president and likely Republican presidential nominee said Monday on The Dan Bongino Show. “That’s really what they want. They want this for the presidential election so they can now blame the Republicans for the worst border in history.”Many Senate Republicans – even those who have expressed support for Ukraine aid and the contours of the border policy changes – raised doubts Monday they would support the package. A private Republican meeting was scheduled in the evening to discuss it.Still, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer moved toward a key test vote on Wednesday.“The actions here in the next few days are an inflection point in history,” the New York Democrat said in a floor speech Monday afternoon. “The security of our nation and of the world hangs in the balance.”Schumer worked closely with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on the border security package after the Kentucky Republican had insisted on the pairing as a way to win support for Ukraine aid. The Democratic leader urged his colleagues across the aisle to “tune out the political noise” and vote yes.“For years, years our Republican colleagues have demanded we fix the border. And all along they said it should be done through legislation. Only recently did they change that when it looks like we might actually produce legislation,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBoth Schumer and McConnell have emphasized for months the urgency of approving tens of billions of dollars for Ukraine’s fight, saying that the US’s ability to buttress democracies around the world was at stake. Yet with the funding stuck in Congress, the defense department has halted shipments of ammunition and missiles to Kyiv.The Republican-majority House passed an Israel-only bill in November, but it was never taken up in the Democratic-led Senate, as members worked on Biden’s request for Congress to approve the broader emergency security package.The statement from House speaker Mike Johnson and representatives Steve Scalise, Tom Emmer and Elise Stefanik pointed to a provision in the bill that would grant work authorizations to people who qualify to enter the asylum system. They also argued that it would endorse a “catch and release” policy by placing people who enter the asylum system in a monitoring program while they await the final decision on their asylum claim.Under the proposal, people who seek asylum, which provides protection for people facing persecution in their home countries, would face a tougher and faster process to having their claim evaluated. The standard in initial interviews would be raised, and many would receive those interviews within days of arriving at the border.Final decisions on their asylum claims would happen within months, rather than the often years-long wait that happens now.But the House Republican leaders said: “Any consideration of this Senate bill in its current form is a waste of time.”Associated Press contributed to this report More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Fact-Checking Claims That Senate Bill Allows 5,000 Unauthorized Immigrants a Day

      by

      Republican critics are misrepresenting one provision of a bipartisan deal to suggest that it permits 5,000 illegal crossings a day.Republican critics have quickly twisted one element of a bipartisan compromise bill unveiled on Sunday to misleadingly suggest that it permits 5,000 migrants to enter the country illegally every day.The legislation, which links additional funding in military aid for Ukraine with immigration policy, would more aggressively tamp down on illegal crossings at the U.S. border with Mexico.The claim has become a popular talking point, reflecting broader pushback by Republicans who have seized on the border security provisions in the $118.3 billion bill and derided them as too lax.But the bill does not, in fact, authorize immigrants to cross the border illegally. Instead, among other provisions, it would give officials the authority to summarily remove migrants, with little recourse, after a certain number cross: an average of 5,000 encounters per day for a week, or 8,500 in a single day.Here’s a fact check.WHAT WAS SAID“The Biden/Schumer Open Border Bill allows 5,000 immigrants a day into our country.”— House Republicans in a social media post on Monday“Here’s what the people pushing this ‘deal’ aren’t telling you: It accepts 5,000 illegal immigrants a day and gives automatic work permits to asylum recipients — a magnet for more illegal immigration.”— Steve Scalise, the House majority leader, in a social media post on SundayWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Ilhan Omar speech proved to be mistranslated but outrage continues spread

      by

      A week after a mistranslated clip of Ilhan Omar sparked outrage online, some far-right House Republicans are still following through with calls for the progressive lawmaker to be censured. And the repercussions of the misinformation extend beyond the country.The Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, has gone furthest in her response to the clip, calling Omar a “foreign agent in our government”. Greene, a leading supporter of Donald Trump, who also attempted to censure the Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib in November, called Omar a “terrorist sympathizer” on X last week, adding: “Somalian first. Muslim second. She never mentions America.”Greene said she would introduce a censure bill which could see the Minnesota Democrat removed from the remaining committees she serves, a year after Omar was forced out of the foreign affairs committee by Republicans for her criticism of Israel. The bill was on the House agenda Monday, though it is unlikely to move past political stunt.Omar, a Somali American congresswoman, had been filmed delivering a speech at a hotel in Minneapolis on 27 January where she addressed members of her constituency on a recent agreement reached between the breakaway Somali region of Somaliland and Ethiopia in early January, which bypassed Somalia’s federal government in Mogadishu.The preliminary deal, termed a memorandum of understanding, would see Somaliland lease Ethiopia a naval base on the Gulf of Aden and grant it widened access to its Berbera port. In exchange, Somaliland officials claim, Ethiopia would become the first country to recognise its independence unilaterally from Somalia.In an interview with the Observer, an adviser to Somalia’s president warned that Somalia was ready for war with Ethiopia if it doesn’t reverse course on the deal.A video of the speech was circulated soon after on X by Rhoda Elmi, Somaliland’s deputy foreign minister. The video’s translation wrongly claimed Omar had said she was “Somalian first and Muslim second”.Mocking the faulty translation, Omar pointed out that the demonym for someone from Somalia is Somali, not Somalian. “If you are gonna talk about us, at least try to get our ethnicity right,” she posted on X.The video, which has been viewed at least 4.5m times, also misquoted Omar as saying she would “liberate” Somali territories, which were “occupied” by neighbouring Kenya and Ethiopia, a polarising issue among Somalis, some of whom weren’t satisfied with the post-colonial settlement when the Horn of Africa was partitioned by Italy, France and the UK.Elmi, Somaliland’s deputy foreign minister, took umbrage at the Minnesota lawmaker’s purported remarks about her position on the memorandum and Somalia’s relations with its neighbours, accusing her of “ethno-racist rhetoric”.Omar defended her comments in the days that followed, saying the subtitles in the video were “not only slanted but completely off”, expressing her support for the government of Somalia, where she was born, as it finds itself embroiled in standoff with Ethiopia.Omar vowed to thwart the deal, which the US has also expressed concerns over, telling people at the gathering in Minneapolis: “For as long as I am in Congress, no one will take over the seas belonging to the nation of Somalia and the United States will not support others who seek to steal from us.”Several Somalis also posted on X about the errors in the subtitles, including the translator and author Aziz Mahdi, who objected to Omar’s remarks but said: “The translation offered fails to accurately convey the essence of her talk, leading to a distorted understanding of her message. So don’t cite it.”The Minnesota Reformer, a Minnesota-based news outlet, worked with two independent Somali translators who recorded Omar as saying: “We are people who know that they are Somali and Muslim”, not that she was “Somalians first” as the video suggested.Abdirashid Hashi, a former Somali government minister, called on Elmi to retract the video and issue an apology.Despite attempts to clarify Omar’s message, several Republicans and rightwing figures seized upon the video without verifying the misleading translation, to launch a fresh attack on Omar, including Elon Musk, whose own ties with third countries were questioned by Joe Biden. On his X account, Musk posted: “The United States or another country. Pick one.”Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor, called for Omar’s denaturalization and deportation, while Tom Emmer, the House majority whip, decried her comments as a “slap in the face” to her constituents and called for an ethics investigation into her remarks.The Greene censure bill could be a further thorn in the congresswoman’s side, but Omar shrugged it off on Thursday. “I truly do not care about what that insane woman does,” she said, according to Politico.And her party is standing behind her. Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, criticised the move as a “frivolous censure resolution, designed to inflame and castigate and further divide us”. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Senators Release Border Deal to Unlock Ukraine Aid, but Fate Remains Uncertain

      by

      Senate Republicans and Democrats on Sunday unveiled a $118.3 billion compromise bill to crack down on unlawful migration across the U.S. border with Mexico and speed critical security aid to Ukraine, but the deal faces long odds in a Congress deeply divided over both issues.The release of the agreement, struck after more than three months of near-daily talks among senators and Biden administration officials, counted as an improbable breakthrough on a policy matter that has bedeviled presidents of both parties and defied decades of efforts at compromise on Capitol Hill. President Biden, who last month promised he would shut down the border immediately if the measure became law, implored Congress on Sunday to pass the bill and send it to his desk as soon as possible.“If you believe, as I do, that we must secure the border now, doing nothing is not an option,” he said in a statement, adding that Republicans “have to decide. Do they want to solve the problem? Or do they want to keep playing politics with the border?”The bill features some of the most significant border security restrictions Congress has contemplated in years. They include making it more difficult to claim asylum, vastly expanding detention capacity and effectively shutting down the border to new entrants if more than an average of 5,000 migrants per day try to cross over unlawfully in the course of a week, or more than 8,500 attempt to cross in any given day.But Speaker Mike Johnson has already pronounced the bill “dead on arrival” in the Republican-controlled House. And with former President Donald J. Trump actively campaigning against the deal, it was not clear whether the measure could even make it out of the Democratic-led Senate, where it needs bipartisan backing to move forward.Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said he planned to put the package to an initial vote on Wednesday, in a critical test of its ability to survive.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      An ex-congressman or a publicity-shy Republican: who will replace George Santos?

      by

      George Santos, an overcoat draped around his shoulders like a villain’s cape, finally left Washington in December, expelled from Congress as he faced more than 20 fraud charges, and after his almost entirely fabricated backstory fell apart.“To hell with this place,” Santos declared as he exited.But while the Republican may be done with Washington, plenty of other people were soon desperate to fill his seat representing New York’s third congressional district.In Long Island, New York, the former congressman Tom Suozzi emerged as the Democratic candidate hoping to replace Santos. Quickly, Suozzi set about distancing himself from the left of his party. He has promised to “battle” the “Squad”, a group of progressive Democratic members of Congress and has discussed the “border crisis”.Mazi Pilip, a relatively unknown local politician, was chosen by a local Republican party desperate to move on from the embarrassment that Santos – whose claims that he was a successful businessman and investor, a graduate of a top New York university and a whiz on the volleyball court had all fallen apart under scrutiny – had brought.While the looming presence of Santos, who has pleaded not guilty to charges including stealing donors’ identities, has piqued national interest, the Suozzi-Pilip match-up could also provide an early insight into what the US can expect in what’s likely to be a second presidential election between Joe Biden and Donald Trump in November.With early and absentee voting due to start in the special election on Saturday – election day is 13 February – so far it seems that immigration is top of the agenda, for Republicans at least.“Joe Biden and Tom Suozzi created the migrant crisis by opening our borders and funding sanctuary cities,” Pilip said recently on X, in a post that seemed to overestimate the achievements and influence of Suozzi, who spent six fairly uneventful years in Congress before stepping down last year.Pilip has run a strange campaign that has seen her duck interviews and largely avoid the press. She has repeatedly sought to tie Suozzi, who represented the district before Santos’s disastrous tenure, to the unpopular Biden. In her telling, Suozzi is also responsible for “runaway inflation”, while Pilip has also attempted to link Suozzi to antisemitism.In a district which the Jewish Democratic Council of America estimates has one of the largest Jewish populations of anywhere in the country, US funding to Israel has proved a key issue so far. Both Pilip, an Orthodox Jew who was born in Ethiopia before moving to Israel and who served in the Israel Defense Forces before coming to the US, and Suozzi are fervent supporters of continued aid.As a largely suburban, purple area, which voted for Biden in the 2020 presidential election before, fatefully, electing Santos in 2022, the race is being closely watched, said Lawrence Levy, former chief political columnist for Newsday and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies at Hofstra University.“It’s almost become a cliche to say that this [district] is a bellwether, but it really is in terms of national elections,” he said. “Competitive suburbs all over the country are the places that for years now have determined who gets the gavels in Congress, and the keys to the White House.”More than 60% of registered voters in New York state believe that the influx of migrants into the state is a “very serious problem”, according to a poll by Siena College in January. The border has come to dominate the election, and the lines of attack are beginning to serve as a preview for November.“What political operatives, and candidates, and donors are looking at around the country is how the strategies and tactics and messaging, in particular, play,” Levy said.“And what that will mean for how they approach their own races, whether it’s Orange county, California; Montgomery and Bucks county [in] Pennsylvania; Oakland county, Michigan: these are our swing suburban areas that are themselves bellwethers in the national elections.”The election has certainly brought in plenty of money. Suozzi has raised $4.5m since he entered the race, Politico reported, with Pilip bringing in $1.3m. Much of the money seems to have gone to local TV channels, with New Yorkers bombarded by attack adverts from both sides.Some of Pilip’s attacks have followed the familiar path of tying her opponent to an unsuccessful incumbent. Although Pilip’s repeated claims about a “Biden-Suozzi immigration crisis” seem something of a stretch given Suozzi’s fairly modest significance in the House of Representatives, where he served on the ways and means committee and was known for his bipartisanship.In some ways, Pilip has already cleared the very low bar set by Santos. A local CBS news channel said it had verified documents showing that Pilip did, as she claimed, study at Haifa and Tel Aviv universities, and serve in the IDF, which suggests she has not invented her history in the way Santos did. (In an email, the IDF said “we cannot comment on the personal details of past or present IDF soldiers” when the Guardian asked to confirm Pilip’s service.)Pilip has run a very quiet campaign. Her largest event so far, which saw several Republican members of Congress trek to Long Island to champion their candidate, was most noticeable for Pilip not being there: she said she was observing the sabbath.There have been complaints from local journalists, including from the New York Times and NPR, that Pilip has left them off invitations to press conferences. During the opening weeks of the campaign she conducted few interviews – one notable effort was an odd video interview with the conservative new outlet the New York Sun, during which Pilip stared into the middle distance as she answered questions.Her campaign did not respond to requests for comment or requests to be added to the press mailing list. The Guardian signed up for supporter emails, and did not receive a single one in the space of five days.It’s a far cry from the attention-pursuing Santos, who recently turned up to a Trump party during the New Hampshire primary, despite not being invited; has been hawking video messages on the app Cameo; and recently insisted in an interview: “People still want to hear what I have to say.”Whatever happens in the special election between Pilip and Suozzi, there will be plenty of people interested in what it might say about the state of US politics – and what we might expect this November. More