Minnesota Democratic Governor Tim Walz STUNNED After Bombshell Discovery - He Belongs in Prison
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison found themselves in the hot seat this week as the House Oversight Committee launched a blistering public hearing regarding massive, multi-billion-dollar fraud allegations tied to state-administered federal welfare programs.
Led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), Republican lawmakers accused the Democratic state leaders of turning a blind eye to unprecedented theft, silencing whistleblowers, and enabling fraudsters out of a fear of political backlash.
THE "COST OF DOING NOTHING" REPORT
The hearing coincided with the release of an explosive 53-page interim staff report titled "The Cost of Doing Nothing: How Tim Walz and Keith Ellison Fueled Minnesota's Fraud Explosion." According to the committee's findings, federal prosecutors estimate that up to $9 billion may have been stolen from just fourteen Medicaid programs administered by the state since 2018.
During his opening remarks, Chairman Comer characterized the situation as "one of the most extensive breakdowns of oversight this Committee has ever examined." The most damning allegations from the committee include:
Silenced Whistleblowers: The committee claims to have interviewed over 30 whistleblowers—many of them current state employees and Democrats—who alleged they were ignored, retaliated against, and even surveilled for attempting to raise fraud concerns.
Delayed Action: The report alleges that Walz and Ellison were aware of widespread fraud in high-risk Medicaid and Child Care Assistance programs as early as spring 2019, yet failed to intervene.
-
Political Fear: Republicans claim state agencies possessed the legal authority to suspend payments to suspected fraudulent providers but chose not to act out of fear of being perceived as discriminatory or facing political retribution from segments of Minneapolis's politically active Somali community.
“What we’ve uncovered in Minnesota is not a paperwork error or a few bad actors slipping through the cracks," Comer declared. "It is a sustained failure of leadership.”
THE "FEEDING OUR FUTURE" CLASH
Tensions reached a boiling point when Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pressed Walz on the infamous Feeding Our Future scandal, where nearly $300 million was stolen from pandemic-era child nutrition programs and allegedly spent on luxury cars, real estate, and overseas investments.
Jordan aggressively questioned why the state restarted payments to the non-profit after initially halting them. Walz and Ellison have previously suggested that the courts forced the state to continue the payments. However, Jordan read directly from a judge’s letter publicly refuting that assertion, stating the court had never ordered the Department of Education to resume the payouts.
"The truth is the state made a choice once again to keep sending money out the door," Comer added.
WALZ AND ELLISON PUSH BACK
Governor Walz and AG Ellison fiercely denied the allegations of a cover-up, portraying the hearing as a heavily politicized attack and placing a significant portion of the blame back onto the federal government.
Walz insisted that his administration has a "zero tolerance" policy for wasted taxpayer dollars. “Let me be clear: In Minnesota, if you defraud public programs, if you steal taxpayer money, we will find you, we will prosecute you, we will convict you, and we will throw you in jail,” Walz testified.
Both state leaders argued that their efforts to combat local fraud have been severely hampered by the Trump administration's "Operation Metro Surge." Ellison claimed that an influx of federal immigration agents has decimated the U.S. Attorney's office in Minnesota, leaving prosecutors "drowning in immigration-related petitions" rather than prosecuting complex financial fraud cases.
Walz went a step further, categorizing the federal pressure and the recent halting of $243 million in Medicaid funding to the state as a "campaign of retribution" targeting Minnesota citizens.
With dozens of convictions already secured at the federal level and Congress demanding full transparency from state agencies, the battle over Minnesota's missing billions is far from over.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
