President Donald Trump announced Friday that he is immediately ending temporary deportation protections for Somali nationals living in Minnesota, expediting the conclusion of a program first implemented in 1991 under then-President George H. W. Bush.
“Minnesota, under Governor Waltz, is a hub of fraudulent money laundering activity. I am, as President of the United States, hereby terminating, effective immediately, the Temporary Protected Status (TPS Program) for Somalis in Minnesota. Somali gangs are terrorizing the people of that great State, and BILLIONS of Dollars are missing. Send them back to where they came from. It’s OVER!” Trump wrote in a late-night
Trump’s declaration comes on the heels of a shocking investigative report by City Journal that said Minnesota, home to the country’s biggest Somali community, is rife with criminality and fraud under Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, and that a lot of the money is being funneled to a terrorist organization in Somalia:
Minnesota is drowning in fraud. Billions in taxpayer dollars have been stolen during the administration of Governor Tim Walz alone. Democratic state officials, overseeing one of the most generous welfare regimes in the country, are asleep at the switch. And the media, duty-bound by progressive pieties, refuse to connect the dots.
In many cases, the fraud has allegedly been perpetrated by members of Minnesota’s sizeable Somali community. Federal counterterrorism sources confirm that millions of dollars in stolen funds have been sent back to Somalia, where they ultimately landed in the hands of the terror group Al-Shabaab. As one confidential source put it: “The largest funder of Al-Shabaab is the Minnesota taxpayer.”
Meanwhile, Walz is facing more federal scrutiny over his administration’s handling of a state housing program that was shut down amid widespread fraud allegations.
Department of Human Services temporary commissioner Shireen Gandhi asked federal officials to help terminate the Housing Stabilization Services program, citing “credible allegations of fraud” and “exponential growth in spending.”
The Medicaid-funded program was intended to help older adults and people with disabilities secure housing. Still, costs soared from an estimated $2.6 million annually in 2017 to $107 million by 2024, according to the
Fraud cases have included Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future scandal, abuses in the state’s autism program, various Medicaid schemes, and most recently, housing assistance.
Two weeks ago, a Lakeville, Minn., man
U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel sentenced Khadar Adan, who pleaded guilty in August to one count of theft of government property, for allowing a fraudulent food distribution site to operate out of his Minneapolis business center, JigJiga.
Adan admitted to accepting $1,000 in illicit proceeds and was ordered to pay the same amount in restitution, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.
Adan was the last of three defendants tied to the Lake Street Kitchen scheme housed within JigJiga to plead guilty.
The $250 million Feeding Our Future case — centered on a St.Anthony nonprofit — is the largest pandemic-era fraud prosecution in the United States. Of the 75 people charged, 50 have entered guilty pleas. Prosecutors say the defendants falsely claimed to have provided millions of meals to children during the COVID-19 pandemic, instead diverting federal reimbursements to purchase luxury cars, real estate, and other high-end goods.
According to court records, Adan and his co-defendants claimed to have served 70,000 meals between December 2020 and April 2021 through Lake Street Kitchen, receiving “significant funds” in return. Federal prosecutors said only a small fraction of those meals were actually distributed.
Co-defendant Liban Yasin Alishire, who co-operated Lake Street Kitchen and another site, Community Enhancement Services, received more than $1.6 million and pleaded guilty in 2023.
Meanwhile, a former campaign associate of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) pleaded guilty last month to participating in the same scam, adding another chapter to the growing list of controversies surrounding the progressive lawmaker’s political orbit.
PHNX Sports writer Gerald Bourget has been terminated following public outrage over remarks he made concerning conservative political figure Charlie Kirk, who was recently assassinated in a high-profile incident that has deeply divided public opinion across the United States.The announcement of Bourget’s dismissal was confirmed late Wednesday evening by PHNX management in a brief statement posted to social media.“PHNX Sports has ended its working relationship with Gerald Bourget, effective immediately,” the statement read. “We do not condone the comments he made and will not allow them to reflect the values of our organization.”
The decision came just hours after a tweet from Bourget went viral, sparking a wave of backlash from readers, political commentators, and supporters of the late activist.While the original tweet has since been deleted, screenshots and reposts of his remarks circulated widely online, prompting calls for disciplinary action and boycotts of the outlet if it failed to act.Although the exact wording of Bourget’s post varied slightly in reposted versions, the essence of the message was clear: his comments were perceived as mocking or dismissive of Kirk’s death.
For many, the timing—just days after Erika Kirk delivered a powerful speech at her husband’s memorial service—made the post all the more inflammatory.“It was completely inappropriate,” said Jenna Marks, a longtime PHNX subscriber. “Even if you disagree with Charlie Kirk politically, mocking someone’s assassination is grotesque. There are lines you don’t cross.”
Bourget, known primarily for his coverage of Arizona sports teams and his NBA commentary, had not previously been involved in political discourse in a significant way.However, his comment about Kirk ignited a national conversation about journalistic ethics, professional boundaries, and the consequences of public statements made on personal social media accounts.Gerald Bourget has been a familiar figure in Arizona sports media for nearly a decade, known for his detailed reporting on the Phoenix Suns and his appearances on sports podcasts and YouTube panels.
A respected figure in his niche, his dismissal shocked many in the local sports journalism community, with colleagues expressing disappointment over what they described as a “self-inflicted professional implosion.”“He’s a talented writer,” said one former colleague who asked not to be named. “But that one post undid years of credibility. In our profession, perception is everything—and that tweet destroyed his public trust.”The response from the public was swift and largely one-sided. Within an hour of the tweet’s circulation, #FireBourget began trending on X (formerly Twitter), with users tagging PHNX Sports and its parent company in thousands of posts demanding action.PHNX’s internal management reportedly moved quickly. According to sources familiar with the situation, editorial staff held an emergency meeting to assess the fallout and evaluate whether Bourget had violated any terms of employment or codes of conduct.Within hours, the decision to terminate was made.
Bourget has not made any further public statements since his firing. His social media accounts were briefly deactivated before returning without any new posts. Attempts to contact him for comment have so far gone unanswered.In the absence of a direct apology or explanation, speculation has swirled around the motivations behind the post.Some suggest Bourget was attempting sarcasm or irony, while others believe it may have been an impulsive reaction to Kirk’s political ideology. Regardless of intent, the impact has been severe.Kirk’s supporters praised PHNX’s decision as a necessary stand for decency and respect, especially in the wake of the emotional public speech delivered by Erika Kirk just days prior. In that speech, she vowed to carry on her husband’s mission and condemned those who sought to silence him.
“This isn’t about politics,” said Mark Lindell, a political strategist. “This is about basic human empathy. When someone is murdered, you don’t joke about it. You don’t mock their death. That kind of rhetoric is toxic and dangerous.”Conservative commentators quickly took up the story as an example of perceived media hostility toward right-leaning figures. Multiple cable news programs covered the incident, and a segment dedicated to Bourget’s firing aired on national television the following morning.“This is the kind of attitude we’ve been calling out for years,” said one political commentator. “People in the media think it’s okay to treat conservatives as subhuman—and when someone dies, they treat it like a punchline.”However, not everyone agreed with the firing. A smaller but vocal group of critics accused PHNX of caving to political pressure and argued that Bourget was simply exercising his right to free speech.
Some worried about the precedent such terminations could set for journalists and public figures who comment on controversial topics.“This is a slippery slope,” said media ethicist Rachel Tanzi. “We need to distinguish between offensive speech and truly unethical behavior. What Bourget said was undoubtedly upsetting to many, but we have to be careful about where we draw the line.”Still, the dominant sentiment among media professionals is that journalists—especially those representing organizations—bear a responsibility to uphold a level of decorum, even in personal commentary.
With social media serving as a direct link between professionals and the public, boundaries between private and professional opinions continue to blur.“We live in a time when a single tweet can cost you everything,” said Tanzi. “That’s the reality. Whether it’s fair or not, it’s the world we operate in.”The fallout from Bourget’s firing arrives during an already tense moment in American politics. The assassination of Charlie Kirk has not only devastated his supporters but has reignited debates about the political climate in the country, including the potential for violence linked to ideological divisions.Erika Kirk’s emotional speech, where she promised that her husband’s mission would not die, struck a nerve with millions. Many viewed her remarks as a powerful call to unity, others as a rallying cry for continued activism.Against this backdrop, Bourget’s tweet came across to many as not only disrespectful but cruelly timed.