Ilhan Omar Makes JAW-DROPPING Claim After CONFRONTED With Undeniable MN Fraud Facts

Ilhan Omar’s “We’re the Real Victims” Claim After Minnesota Fraud Bombshell

Representative Ilhan Omar is facing renewed backlash after a high‑profile appearance on CBS’s Face the Nation, where she responded to undeniable facts about the massive Minnesota welfare fraud scandal—and then made a jaw‑dropping claim that shocked many viewers.

Confronted with the reality that of 87 people charged, all but eight are of Somali descent, Omar did not focus on the American taxpayers who were defrauded or on the staggering scale of the scam. Instead, she pivoted to argue that the Somali community itself is also a victim, because Somalis are “also taxpayers” and “also could have benefited” from the stolen money.

To critics, this sounded less like accountability and more like inversion: the community overwhelmingly implicated in perpetrating the fraud casting itself as the primary victim of it.

The Fraud: From $250 Million to a Potential $8 Billion

The scandal in question is the now‑infamous Minnesota welfare and food‑aid fraud—centered on organizations like Feeding Our Future—which began as a roughly $250 million scheme and has, according to whistleblowers and investigators, ballooned into something far larger. Some estimates suggest the full scope of related fraud could reach $1 billion, and potentially as high as $8 billion when connected scams and programs are included.

The core allegations:

Federal COVID‑era food and welfare funds, meant to feed poor children and support struggling families, were diverted on a massive scale.
Fake meal sites, fabricated rosters, and sham invoices were submitted to siphon funds.
Money intended for hungry kids and low‑income households instead paid for luxury cars, houses, travel, and overseas transfers.

The demographic reality is politically sensitive but mathematically undeniable:

Of the 87 defendants charged so far, 79 are of Somali descent.

That fact alone has drawn intense scrutiny toward the Somali community in Minnesota—and toward Ilhan Omar, its most prominent political figure.

Omar’s Response: Somalis as “Also Victims”

On Face the Nation, host Margaret Brennan outlined the basic facts and then asked Omar why the fraud was allowed to become so widespread, and what it means that nearly all of the defendants are Somali.

Instead of directly addressing why such a high percentage of those charged come from one specific community, Omar pivoted:

“Well, I want to say, you know, this also has an impact on Somalis, because we are also taxpayers in Minnesota. We also could have benefited from the program and the money that was stolen. And so it’s been really frustrating for people to not acknowledge the fact that we’re also—as Minnesotans, as taxpayers—really upset and angry about the fraud that has occurred.”

In other words:

Yes, Somalis were heavily involved in the fraud.
But Somalis are also taxpayers.
Therefore, the Somali community is also a victim of the fraud and the backlash.

To her critics, this is a stunning reframing:

The American public sees a targeted, systemic abuse of U.S. welfare systems by a network dominated by one ethnic group.
Omar responds by emphasizing that the same group is “hurt” because they missed out on money that might have legitimately flowed to them.

The rhetorical effect is to gloss over responsibility and pull the Somali community back into the victim column—while the American taxpayer, once again, is expected to sit quietly and absorb the loss.

The Numbers Don’t Add Up: Taxes vs. Fraud

Omar and her defenders have repeatedly argued that Somali Minnesotans are a vital part of the state economy, emphasizing that the community:

Works,
Pays taxes,
Contributes to local businesses and labor markets.

Some pro‑Somali advocacy groups have cited figures like $67 million in annual tax contributions from Somali residents in Minnesota.

Critics respond with a simple comparison:

At least $250 million has already been confirmed stolen in this one fraud scheme alone.
The DOJ and watchdogs estimate around $1 billion in total fraud connected to Minnesota food/welfare programs.
Some whistleblowers say the full scope could be up to $8 billion when all related scams are accounted for.

Even at the conservative level:

If Somali Minnesotans pay roughly $67 million in taxes each year
But their networks are implicated in hundreds of millions—possibly up to a billion or more—in fraud,

Then the claim that they are “net contributors” or that their tax payments balance out this systemic abuse becomes extremely hard to take seriously.

It’s not “Somalis pay taxes” vs. “nothing.”
It’s $67 million in vs. hundreds of millions (or more) out.

Yet Omar’s narrative asks Americans to feel grateful for the tax contributions while downplaying the scale of the theft.

From Facts to Identity: Calling Stephen Miller a “Nazi”

It’s not just fraud where Omar’s reaction has raised eyebrows. When confronted with harsh criticism from Trump‑aligned figures like Stephen Miller—the architect of much of Trump’s immigration policy—Omar reaches for a now‑familiar rhetorical weapon: Nazi comparisons.

Brennan read a statement from Miller:

“No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions and terrors of their broken homelands.”

Miller’s argument, whether one agrees or not, is essentially this:

When large numbers of people immigrate from failed or corrupt states,
And when assimilation is weak or discouraged,
There is a risk that they will recreate the same dysfunctional systems, practices, and norms that damaged their homelands—in this case, potentially including fraud, clan networks, and disregard for Western legal norms.

Instead of engaging that concern on its merits, Omar replied:

“When I think about Stephen Miller and his white supremacist rhetoric, it reminds me of the way the Nazis described Jewish people in Germany…”

She then invoked historical examples of Irish, Italian, and Jewish immigrants being demonized, casting herself and her community as heirs to that mistreatment. Her supporters see this as a moral equivalence: then it was Jews; now it’s Somalis.

Her critics point out two problems:

Substance Dodged

Absurd Analogy

Jewish

This fits a pattern: when cornered with hard facts or uncomfortable questions, Omar defaults to:

“White supremacy,”
“Nazis,”
“Racism,”
“Xenophobia.”

The goal, critics say, is to shut down debate rather than confront what is actually happening on the ground.

“Unhealthy Obsession”: Omar vs. Trump

Omar also claimed that former President Donald Trump has an “unhealthy and creepy obsession” with her and the Somali community.

“We feel like there is an unhealthy obsession that he has on the Somali community and an unhealthy and creepy obsession that he has with me.”

In her framing:

Trump’s focus on Somali fraud, crime, and assimilation issues is rooted in bigotry and a desire to scapegoat immigrants.
His harsh language—calling Somali immigrants people who “do nothing but complain,” who “come from hell”—is dehumanizing and dangerous.

Critics respond that Trump’s “obsession” did not emerge in a vacuum:

When 75% or more of a given refugee community ends up on welfare programs,
When dozens of members of that same community are indicted in massive fraud schemes,
When informal networks may be sending millions in stolen money overseas, possibly into regions where terror groups like al‑Shabaab operate,

Then it is not irrational for a president—or any politician—to focus on that pattern. It may be blunt, harsh, and politically charged, but it’s not purely invented prejudice.

For many Americans, the question is basic:

“Why should we be forced to quietly accept being defrauded by people we took in, sheltered, and supported—and then be called racists when we protest?”

The Terrorism Question: Still Open

Treasury officials and investigators like Scott Bessent have laid out a disturbing financial trail:

Money stolen from Minnesota programs was channeled through money transfer services (MTOs)—often used in diaspora communities to send remittances abroad.
These transfers went to the Middle East and Somalia, outside the tightly regulated U.S. banking system.
The specific end use of much of that money is still under investigation.

In an interview clip, Bessent explained:

“A lot of money has been transferred from the individuals who committed this fraud… including those who donated to the governor, to Representative Omar, and to AG Ellison… to wire transfer organizations outside the regulated banking system… to the Middle East and to Somalia. We are tracking that to see what the uses of that have been.”

When pressed by Brennan, he acknowledged that no public proof yet links the funds directly to terrorism. But he stressed:

The investigation has only recently begun.
The concern is serious enough to warrant federal scrutiny.
Omar “tried to downplay it” and “gaslight” the public about how the funds were used.

Omar says if U.S. funds are helping terrorism in Somalia, she wants to know and wants prosecutions. But critics doubt how aggressive she would be if a formal terrorism link led to:

Travel restrictions on Somalia,
A blacklist designation,
Tighter limits on refugee admissions and family reunification.

Those measures would directly impact the same networks that form her political base.

The Assimilation Problem the Media Won’t Touch

One of the most striking absences in mainstream interviews is honest talk about assimilation.

Commentators critical of Omar argue that:

Many Somali immigrants in Minnesota do not strongly identify as American.
Somali is widely spoken, English often limited.
Loyalties, emotionally and politically, often remain oriented toward Somalia.
Cultural norms from a fragile, clan‑based, deeply corrupt society are being transplanted into American neighborhoods and politics.

They argue that figures like Margaret Brennan—traveling between elite D.C. neighborhoods, high‑end gyms, and studio sets—rarely set foot in these communities, and therefore lack firsthand perspective. Yet these media elites are the ones shaping national narratives about “who we are” and “what’s really happening.”

The result:

People outside those bubbles watch one thing in their neighborhoods—fraud, insularity, resistance to assimilation—while the national media tells them:

Everything is fine;
Concerns are “racist rhetoric”;
Critics are “Nazis” or “white supremacists.”

That cognitive dissonance is a powerful driver of political backlash.

The Core Issue: Fraud, Not Feelings

Strip away the rhetoric, and this is the bottom line:

American taxpayers were robbed—on a massive scale.
Much of that fraud was concentrated in one ethnic and religious community.
Some of the perpetrators donated to the very politicians who now insist they were shocked and appalled.
Stolen money was sent overseas, into regions where extremist groups operate.
The people raising the loudest alarms are branded “racist,” “white supremacist,” or compared to Nazis.

In that context, Ilhan Omar’s claim that Somali Minnesotans are the “real” victims of this scandal because they might have benefited from the stolen programs is not just tone‑deaf. To many Americans, it is infuriating.

Americans already resent paying high taxes. They resent watching those taxes fund foreign wars, bloated bureaucracies, and failing programs. Add to that:

Large‑scale fraud,
Ethnic patronage,
Overseas transfers,
And then a lecture that criticizing any of this is “bigoted”—

and it becomes clear why there is a growing demand for leaders like Trump, Stephen Miller, and Tom Homan to “go after what is happening here,” as the commentator put it.

Conclusion: Gaslighting Won’t Work Anymore

Ilhan Omar’s Face the Nation appearance will be remembered less for its talking points and more for what it revealed:

A refusal to squarely confront the extent of fraud within her own community.
A reliance on identity politics and Nazi analogies instead of substantive argument.
A stunning attempt to cast the heavily implicated community as the primary victim.
A media class that, while beginning to ask harder questions, still hesitates to follow them to their logical conclusion.

Americans are not stupid. They know the difference between genuine refugees and those who abuse the system. They know the difference between honest immigrants trying to build a life and organized fraud networks exploiting every loophole.

And they know that being angry about billions in stolen funds does not make them “Nazis.”

If anything, it makes them exactly what they’re supposed to be in a republic: citizens who refuse to be gaslit into accepting corruption as the price of compassion.

.
.