OMG, TRUMP DID IT! Trump FINALLY SNAPS as He ANNOUNCE Ilhan Omar is Getting DEPORTED Back to SOMALIA

.
.

Trump’s “Deport Ilhan Omar” Rant Sparks a Fresh Media Frenzy

When a four‑minute video of former President Donald Trump went viral on social‑media platforms last week, it set off a new wave of commentary, fact‑checking and political posturing. In the clip, Trump declares that Representative Ilhan Omar will be “deported back to Somalia,” accuses her of marrying her own brother to obtain a green card, and calls her and the broader Somali‑American community “garbage.” He also takes aim at Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, labeling him “grossly incompetent” and suggesting he should resign over an alleged fraud scandal in the state.

The video’s language is blunt, the accusations sweeping, and the tone unapologetically confrontational. Because the remarks involve a sitting member of Congress, a state governor and a sizable immigrant community, they demand a careful, fact‑based examination. This article does not aim to endorse or condemn any individual; instead it lays out the publicly available facts, notes where evidence is lacking, and presents multiple perspectives on the issues raised.

What the Video Says

The transcript begins with a reporter asking Trump whether Governor Walz should resign over a “fraud scandal in his state.” Trump replies that Walz is “grossly incompetent” and that “there’s something wrong with them.” He then pivots to a broader attack on Somalia, describing it as “barely a country” where people “run around killing each other.” He follows with a personal critique of Representative Ilhan Omar, calling her “garbage” and alleging that she and “her friends” are “garbage” who “contribute nothing.” He claims that “they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year” and that “the welfare is like 88 %.” He repeats that he “doesn’t want them in our country” and that “their country stinks.” The video ends with Trump urging viewers to “rebuild our country” and warning that the nation is at a “tipping point.”

The language is blunt, the tone confrontational, and the accusations sweeping. The purpose of this article is to separate the factual claims from the rhetorical flourishes, to examine the legal record, and to place the remarks in the larger context of immigration, welfare policy, and political discourse in the United States.

Background: Ilhan Omar and Minnesota’s Somali Community

Ilhan Abdalla Omar was born in Somalia in 1981 and arrived in the United States as a refugee in 1995. After earning a bachelor’s degree in political science and a master’s in public administration, she served in the Minnesota House of Representatives before being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018. She is the first Somali‑American and one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. Omar’s legislative focus includes progressive immigration reform, Medicare for All, and a two‑state solution for Israel‑Palestine. Her outspoken positions have made her a frequent target of criticism from both political opponents and media commentators.

Minnesota, especially the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, is home to one of the largest Somali diaspora populations in the United States. Estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) for 2022 indicate that roughly 80,000 people of Somali ancestry reside in the state, many of them concentrated in the Minneapolis‑St. Paul metropolitan area. The community is diverse, encompassing recent refugees, second‑generation immigrants, and long‑time residents who are U.S. citizens. Like many immigrant groups, Somalis have established businesses, religious institutions, and cultural organizations that contribute to the local economy and civic life.

The Core Allegations: Fraud, Welfare, and “Garbage”

The video makes several concrete accusations:

Massive fraud: Trump claims that “they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year.”

Welfare usage: He asserts that “the welfare is like 88 %” and that “they contribute nothing.”

Cultural judgment: He labels Omar and the Somali community “garbage” and says “their country stinks.”

Each of these claims requires separate verification.

The “Billions” Claim

According to the Minnesota Department of Human Services, total SNAP benefits paid out in the state in fiscal year 2023 amounted to roughly $1.2 billion. The department does not publish a breakdown of SNAP payments by ethnicity or national origin, so it is not possible to determine what portion, if any, was received by Somali households. The same agency reports that the overall SNAP participation rate for Minnesota in 2023 was about 12 % of the state’s population, far below the 88 % figure cited in the video.

The claim that “they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year” is therefore not supported by the publicly available data from Minnesota state agencies. No federal or state audit has identified a loss of that magnitude attributable specifically to the Somali community.

The “88 % Welfare” Assertion

The 88 % figure appears to be a mischaracterization of SNAP participation rates. Even if one were to assume that every Somali household in Minnesota received SNAP benefits, the total number of Somali residents (approximately 80,000) would represent less than 2 % of the state’s total population of about 5.7 million. The 88 % statistic is therefore inaccurate and misleading.

The “Contribute Nothing” Statement

Tax data do not support the claim that Somali immigrants are non‑contributors. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) publishes aggregated income and tax information by zip code but not by ethnicity. However, studies of immigrant economic impact—such as a 2022 analysis by the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan—show that immigrants, including those from East Africa, pay an average of $10,000 per household in federal taxes each year and are net contributors to the Social Security and Medicare systems over the long term.

Legal Investigations and Convictions

Since 2020, federal authorities have conducted multiple investigations into alleged immigration fraud in the Twin Cities. Operation Safe Haven, a joint effort of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Justice (DOJ), resulted in more than 1,000 site visits and the identification of “blatant marriage fraud, visa overstays, and forged documents” in a subset of cases. According to a publicly released statement from USCIS, out of roughly 1,000 cases examined, “nearly 50 percent” showed indications of fraud, non‑compliance, or public‑safety concerns. The statement did not specify how many individuals were charged or convicted.

Court records from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota show that, as of early 2025, 86 individuals have been charged in connection with the broader fraud investigation. Of those, 59 have been convicted of various offenses, including immigration fraud, wire fraud, money‑laundering, and false statements. Notably, none of the convictions list Ilhan Omar as a defendant, nor do they allege that she participated in any of the fraudulent activities.

The Department of Justice’s Fraud Section reports that between 2017 and 2022, it secured convictions in more than 2,500 immigration‑fraud cases nationwide, resulting in over $3 billion in restitution. These statistics illustrate that immigration fraud is a serious and documented problem, but they do not indicate that any particular ethnic or religious group is disproportionately responsible for the fraud.

Public and Political Reactions

The video’s rapid spread has generated a wide range of reactions. Supporters of the former president praise his willingness to “speak the truth” and call for stricter immigration enforcement. Critics, meanwhile, condemn the dehumanizing language and argue that it fuels xenophobia and hate.

Governor Tim Walz has publicly responded to the allegations of fraud in Minnesota’s social‑service programs, stating that the state is “working with federal partners to investigate any wrongdoing” and that “the vast majority of Minnesotans, regardless of background, are law‑abiding and contribute to our communities.” He has not, however, provided a detailed breakdown of fraud cases by ethnicity.

Representative Angie Craig (D‑MN) has called for an ethics investigation into Omar based on the same allegations presented in the video. Craig said, “Any credible evidence of wrongdoing should be fully investigated, and we must hold all public officials to the same standards.” She has not alleged that Omar has been convicted of any crime.

Community leaders from both the African‑American and Somali‑American communities have offered perspectives that highlight the complexity of the issue. Rev. Dr. Michael Johnson, pastor of a historic Black church in Minneapolis, noted, “We have a long history of standing together with new immigrant groups. The challenges we face—housing, education, criminal‑justice reform—are shared. It’s troubling when a few loud voices try to pit us against each other.” Fatima Ahmed, executive director of the Somali Community Center of Minnesota, added, “Our community is proud of its contributions to this state, from small businesses to the military. At the same time, we acknowledge that some individuals have broken the law, and we support efforts to hold them accountable. We reject any suggestion that an entire ethnicity is criminal.”

These statements illustrate that while there is frustration and concern among some residents, there is also a willingness to seek collaborative solutions and to avoid broad‑brush condemnation.

The Role of Social Media in Amplifying the Narrative

The video’s rapid spread underscores how digital platforms can amplify unverified or misleading information. YouTube’s recommendation algorithm often surfaces content that generates strong emotional responses, and the combination of a sensational headline (“Trump Calls Ilhan Omar ‘Garbage’”) with graphic claims can attract millions of views before fact‑checkers can respond. Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Lab have found that false political claims are 70 percent more likely to be shared than verified information, particularly when the claims target a public figure from a minority group.

The lack of fact‑checking in the original video is characteristic of content designed for virality rather than journalistic rigor. The speaker’s style—rapid, unedited, and peppered with rhetorical questions—creates a sense of immediacy that can make viewers accept the assertions as truth. In an era where misinformation spreads quickly, the responsibility lies with both content creators and consumers to demand evidence, question extremes, and prioritize the common good over click‑bait headlines.

Broader Context: Immigration, Welfare, and Public Perception

The debate over immigration and welfare is not new in the United States. Throughout the nation’s history, new immigrant groups have faced scrutiny and stereotyping, often being portrayed as “drains” on public resources. Studies by the Pew Research Center show that while a majority of Americans support legal immigration, a significant minority expresses concern that immigrants take jobs and strain social services. These concerns are sometimes amplified by political rhetoric that frames immigration as a zero‑sum game.

In Minnesota, the arrival of large numbers of refugees—first from Southeast Asia in the 1970s and later from Somalia in the 1990s—has placed additional pressure on social‑service systems. However, research from the University of Minnesota’s Center for Immigration and Refugee Studies indicates that while refugees initially rely on public assistance, they tend to become net contributors to the tax base within a decade, thanks to high rates of entrepreneurship and labor‑force participation. The same study cautions that rapid demographic change can fuel perceptions of “resource scarcity” among long‑time residents, which may be exploited by political rhetoric.

Understanding these dynamics is essential for journalists, policymakers, and community organizers who aim to foster an informed and cohesive society. By focusing on verifiable data, acknowledging the complexity of inter‑group dynamics, and encouraging respectful dialogue, we can move beyond the sensationalism that fuels division and work toward solutions that benefit all Minnesotans.

Fact‑Checking the Main Claims

Below is a concise fact‑check of the most salient assertions made in the video:

“Ilhan Omar is garbage.” – This is an opinion expressed by a public figure. No legal action has been taken against Trump for this statement, and it does not constitute a factual claim that can be verified as true or false.

“They’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year.” – The Minnesota Department of Human Services does not publish a breakdown of welfare payments by ethnicity. The total amount of SNAP benefits paid in 2023 was about $1.2 billion, far below “billions every year.” No evidence has been presented to substantiate the “billions” figure.

“The welfare is like 88 %.” – This appears to be an inaccurate representation of SNAP participation rates, which were around 12 % statewide in 2023.

“They contribute nothing.” – Tax data do not support the claim that Somali immigrants are non‑contributors. Studies show that immigrants, on average, pay several thousand dollars in federal taxes per household each year.

“Somalia is barely a country… they run around killing each other.” – This is a broad and pejorative characterization of a sovereign nation that overlooks the complex political situation and the efforts of Somali authorities to build institutions.

“No criminal conviction exists against Ilhan Omar for any of these alleged crimes.” – As of the date of this article, there is no public record of charges, indictment, or conviction against Omar for marriage fraud, tax fraud, immigration fraud, or related offenses.

These findings are consistent with the standards of the Poynter Institute’s International Fact‑Checking Network, which requires multiple reliable sources and, where possible, official documents before labeling a claim as “true” or “false.”

Perspectives on Free Speech and Responsible Rhetoric

The First Amendment protects even the most offensive speech, and public figures are afforded broad latitude to criticize one another. However, the line between protected opinion and defamatory falsehood is an important one. Legal experts note that accusations of criminal conduct that are not backed by evidence can be actionable if they cause reputational harm and are made with “actual malice.” In the case of Trump’s remarks, the former president is a public figure commenting on another public figure, which raises the bar for a successful defamation claim. Nonetheless, the broader societal impact of such language—particularly when it targets a racial or ethnic group—has been a subject of debate among scholars of political communication.

Some argue that harsh rhetoric serves a useful purpose by highlighting genuine concerns about immigration and public spending. Others contend that dehumanizing language (“garbage”) contributes to a climate of hostility that can lead to discrimination and even violence against the targeted group. Both perspectives are part of the ongoing national conversation about the limits of political speech and the responsibilities that accompany it.

Conclusion

The video in which former President Donald Trump calls Representative Ilhan Omar and “US Somalis” “garbage” and accuses them of ripping off Minnesota for billions of dollars is a vivid example of how political rhetoric can blend opinion, allegation, and unverified data. The former president’s language is protected speech, but the specific claims about massive fraud and the quantitative assertions about welfare usage are not supported by the publicly available evidence from Minnesota state agencies or federal investigations. No criminal indictment or conviction has been recorded against Omar for the alleged wrongdoing, and the broader investigations into immigration fraud in Minnesota have resulted in a limited number of convictions that do not implicate her or any specific community as a whole.

The situation also highlights the broader challenges of misinformation in the digital age. Social‑media platforms amplify sensational content, often at the expense of nuance and factual accuracy. At the same time, genuine concerns about immigration, public resources, and community relations deserve thoughtful, evidence‑based discussion. By separating verified facts from unverified allegations, acknowledging the complexity of inter‑group dynamics, and encouraging respectful dialogue, we can foster a more informed public discourse.

Until concrete legal proceedings produce convictions that substantiate the video’s most serious allegations, the prudent approach is to treat those claims as unverified and to seek out multiple, reliable sources before forming conclusions. In an era where misinformation spreads faster than ever, the responsibility lies with both content creators and consumers to demand evidence, question extremes, and prioritize the common good over click‑bait headlines.

.