Trump calls Ilhan Omar, US Somalis “garbage,” claims they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions

.
.

Trump Calls Ilhan Omar and “US Somalis” “Garbage,” Claims They Have Ripped Off Minnesota for Billions

In a recent video that has been shared widely on social‑media platforms, former President Donald J. Trump is heard using the word “garbage” to describe Representative Ilhan Omar and, more broadly, the Somali community in the United States. The clip, which runs for several minutes, includes a monologue that mixes personal commentary, accusations of massive financial fraud, and stark cultural judgments. Because the remarks involve a sitting member of Congress and touch on issues of immigration, ethnicity, and public finance, it is useful to examine the statements in detail, compare them with publicly available information, and place them in the broader context of immigration‑related debates in Minnesota and the nation. This article does not aim to endorse or condemn any individual; rather, it seeks to lay out the facts that are on the record, note where evidence is lacking, and present perspectives from a range of stakeholders.

The video opens with Trump saying, “Elon Omar is garbage. She’s garbage. Her friends are garbage.” He goes on to assert that “they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year… they contribute nothing. The welfare is like 88 %.” He later adds, “We don’t want them in our country. Their country is no good for a reason. Their country stinks.” The former president’s language is blunt, and the tone is confrontational. The transcript also includes repeated references to Somalia as “barely a country” that “runs around killing each other.” While the video’s style is informal and unedited, the statements are part of a public discourse that has been amplified by social‑media algorithms.

From a legal standpoint, public figures such as Trump are permitted to express opinions, even harsh ones, under the First Amendment. However, accusations that imply criminal conduct—such as the claim that the Somali community has “ripped off Minnesota for billions”—can be defamatory if they are false and made with “actual malice.” To date, no criminal indictment or conviction has been issued against Ilhan Omar, nor against any organization that would substantiate the claim of a coordinated, billion‑dollar fraud perpetrated by Somalis in Minnesota. The absence of a conviction is a key point: the policy of this article is to report only verified legal outcomes unless a conviction exists.

Background on Ilhan Omar and the Somali Community in Minnesota

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 has included 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, particularly 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.

What the Transcript Says About Fraud and Welfare

The video makes several specific claims about financial misconduct: that “they’ve ripped off Minnesota for billions of dollars, billions every year,” that “the welfare is like 88 %,” and that “they contribute nothing.” These statements appear to refer to public‑assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, and various COVID‑19 relief initiatives. To evaluate these claims, it is necessary to look at the data that are publicly available.

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. Of that total, the department does not publish a breakdown 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 contribute nothing” also runs counter to tax data. 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.

In short, the specific numerical assertions in the video—“billions every year” and “88 % welfare”—are not supported by the publicly available data from Minnesota state agencies. The lack of a verifiable source means that these statements remain allegations rather than established facts.

Legal Investigations and Convictions Related to Immigration Fraud in Minnesota

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 Statements from Elected Officials and Community Leaders

The video includes excerpts from Trump’s remarks, but it also contains references to other politicians. The speaker mentions Governor Tim Walz, calling him “grossly incompetent.” Governor 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 Core Assertions

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.

.