CHRG-119hhrg62434 (OVERSIGHT OF FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FEDERAL FUNDS IN MINNESOTA: PART I)
Summary
Transcript of the hearing Oversight of Fraud and Misuse of Federal Funds in Minnesota: Part I, before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, on January 7, 2026 (Serial No. 119–54). Opening statements are listed for Chairman James Comer and Ranking Member Robert Garcia. Witnesses were Minnesota state representatives Kristin Robbins, Walter Hudson and Marion Rarick of the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee, and minority witness Mr. Brendan Ballou, listed as a Former Special Counsel. The index lists news articles submitted by Rep. Garcia, and the Committee adjourned at 6:39 p.m.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“CHRG-119hhrg62434 (OVERSIGHT OF FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FEDERAL FUNDS IN MINNESOTA: PART I).”
Original at www.govinfo.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/chrg-119hhrg62434-oversight-of-fraud-and-misuse-of-federal-funds-in-mi-24f0c7b7a6/
, SHA-256 05c9192292d0824a8d4e3b0c4920dc296a96f503a0246c946ea2f6979e3e92d4.Full text
OVERSIGHT OF FRAUD AND MISUSE OF
FEDERAL FUNDS IN MINNESOTA: PART I
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JANUARY 7, 2026
Serial No. 119–54
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
(
Available on: govinfo.gov, oversight.house.gov or docs.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62–434 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
JIM JORDAN, Ohio ROBERT GARCIA, California, Ranking Minority
MIKE TURNER, Ohio Member
PAUL GOSAR, Arizona ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina Columbia
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI, Illinois
GARY PALMER, Alabama RO KHANNA, California
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana KWEISI MFUME, Maryland
PETE SESSIONS, Texas SHONTEL BROWN, Ohio
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona MELANIE STANSBURY, New Mexico
NANCY MACE, South Carolina MAXWELL FROST, Florida
PAT FALLON, Texas SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
BYRON DONALDS, Florida GREG CASAR, Texas
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina EMILY RANDALL, Washington
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM, Virginia
LAUREN BOEBERT, Colorado YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona
ANNA PAULINA LUNA, Florida WESLEY BELL, Missouri
NICK LANGWORTHY, New York LATEEFAH SIMON, California
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri DAVE MIN, California
ELI CRANE, Arizona AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts
BRIAN JACK, Georgia RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan
JOHN MCGUIRE, Virginia JAMES R. WALKINSHAW, Virginia
BRANDON GILL, Texas
Vacancy
MARK MARIN, Staff Director
JAMES RUST, Deputy Staff Director
RYAN GIACHETTI, Chief Counsel
DANIEL FALCONE, Professional Staff Member
ROBERT FLORES, Professional Staff Member
JACK FURLA, Professional Staff Member
MARY WOODARD, Senior Counsel
MALLORY COGAR, Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
CONTACT NUMBER: 202–225–5074
ROBERT EDMONSON, Minority Staff Director
CONTACT NUMBER: 202–225–5051
(II)
C O N T E N T S
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hon. James Comer, U.S. Representative, Chairman ............................................ 1
Hon. Robert Garcia, U.S. Representative, Ranking Member ............................... 3
WITNESSES
The Honorable Kristin Robbins, Representative (37A), MN House of Rep-
resentatives, Chair, Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy
Committee
Oral Statement ........................................................................................................ 5
The Honorable Walter Hudson, Representative (30A), MN House of Rep-
resentatives, Member, Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy
Committee
Oral Statement ........................................................................................................ 7
The Honorable Marion Rarick, Representative (29B), MN House of Represent-
atives, Member, Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Com-
mittee
Oral Statement ........................................................................................................ 9
Mr. Brendan Ballou (Minority Witness), Former Special Counsel, U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice
Oral Statement ........................................................................................................ 10
Written opening statements and bios are available on the U.S. House of
Representatives Document Repository at: docs.house.gov.
(III)
INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘Deadly Minneapolis Encounter Is the
9th ICE Shooting Since September’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, CBS Minnesota, ‘‘Director of Minnesota day care featured in
YouTube video on fraud responds’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, FOX 9 Minneapolis-St Paul, ‘‘Feds say No indication Minnesota
fraudsters were seeking to fund terrorists’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, The Intercept, ‘‘Minnesota Somali Fraud Video Source Decried
‘Demon Muslims’ ’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘More Agents Head to Minnesota as U.S.
Takes Over Shooting Investigation’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, Vox, ‘‘Nick Shirley and his Viral Right-Wing Videos, Explained’’;
submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, MN Star Tribune, ‘‘Renee Nicole Good Identified as Woman Shot,
Killed by ICE in Minneapolis’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, The Guardian, ‘‘Somalis are the Scapegoat—Fear Rises as Trump
Targets Minneapolis Community—Minneapolis’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘The ICE Shooting Came During an Oper-
ation Focused on Somali Immigrants’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, CNN, ‘‘Trump Attorney Eric Herschmann Now Representing
Brett Favre Amid Mississippi Welfare Scandal’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Press Release, ‘‘Child Care Aware® of America on Potential Child Care
Funding Freeze and Reports of Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Press Release, ‘‘Child Care Movement Calls Out Trump Administration’s
Freeze of Child Care Funding’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Press Release, ‘‘Peters Unveils Report Finding Fired IGs Identified More
Savings than DOGE—Cmte Homeland Security Governmental Affairs’’;
submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Press Release, ‘‘Trump Administration Rule Raises Child Care Costs
Amid Escalating Attacks—NWLC’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Statement from NAFCC, Childcare Funding Actions and Overall Over-
sight; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘Somalis Fled Civil War and Built a Com-
munity, Now They Are a Target’’; submitted by Rep. Garcia.
* Article, AIC, ‘‘Immigrants Contribute Billions to Federal and State Taxes
Each Year’’; submitted by Rep. Ansari.
* Article, AIC, ‘‘Immigrants Do Not Commit More Crimes in the US, De-
spite Fearmongering’’; submitted by Rep. Ansari.
* Article, The Washington Post, ‘‘Trump Amplifies Conspiracy Theories on
Killing of Minnesota Lawmaker’’; submitted by Rep. Ansari.
* Report, HSGAC, ‘‘Undermining The Watchdogs’’; submitted by Rep. Bell.
* 18 U.S. Code, Section 666, Theft or Bribery Concerning Programs Receiv-
ing Federal Funds; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Townhall, ‘‘A YouTuber’s Follow-up Video on MN Fraud is Just
as Wild’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
(IV)
* Article, AZ Center for Investigative Reporting, ‘‘Arizona has Recovered
5% of Taxpayer Dollars Lost in Medicaid Fraud Scheme’’; submitted by
Rep. Biggs.
* Article, The Gateway Pundit, ‘‘Beyond Parody, Craigslist Ad from a
Daycare Center in MN Seeks to Hire 20 Child Actors’’; submitted by Rep.
Biggs.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘Biden Clemency for Convicted Fraudsters Met With
Outrage’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Must Read Alaska, ‘‘Biden Pardons More People in His Criminal
Clan’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Townhall, ‘‘Did You Miss This Story About Alleged Medicaid
Fraud From a Somali-Run Health Services Provider in ME’’; submitted
by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, The Gateway Pundit, ‘‘Dr. Oz Orders Full Scale Federal Audit
of MN Medicaid Under Tim Walz’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Alpha News, ‘‘Exclusive, DHS Insider Claims Systemic Issues
in Addressing Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, NYP, ‘‘Exclusive, Treasury, House Panel Launch Probes into
Tim Walz’s Handling of $1B Food Aid Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, WH, ‘‘Here is What the Trump Administration Is Doing to Crush
Minnesota’s Fraud Epidemic’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Caller, ‘‘HHS Freezes Childcare Payments to Minnesota
After Massive Fraud Alleged’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, AOL, ‘‘Jonathan Turley Explains Why Feds Can Dig Deep Into
Somali Scammer Scandal’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Twitchy, ‘‘Master Class—AG Hamilton Schools WaPo Hack Play-
ing Race Card to Defend Somali Fraud Ring’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘Minnesota Fraud Committee Chair Claims Walz
‘Turned a Blind Eye’ to Fraud Warnings for Years’’; submitted by Rep.
Biggs.
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘Minnesotas Quality Learing Center Fixes Sign, Ad-
dress Still Misspelled’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘MN Adds Medicaid Fraud Verification Amid Alleged
$9B Losses’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘MN’s Somali Fraudsters Paid for Rich Lifestyles with
Stolen Money’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Caller, ‘‘Resurfaced Video Shows How Somali Scammers
Used Day Care Centers To Scam State’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Washington Post, ‘‘Scrutinizing SNAP Will Help Ensure the
Neediest Get Food Stamps’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, The Gateway Pundit, ‘‘Senator John Kennedy Brings Somali
Fraud to the Senate Floor’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Caller, ‘‘The Somali Fraud Scandal Gave Trump a Kill
Switch—What Happens If He Does Not Use It’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Signal, ‘‘Tim Walz Claims He Fired People Amid Fraud
Scandals But Won’t Name Names’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, WSJ, ‘‘Tim Walz Was Brought Down by a Scandal Hiding in
Plain Sight’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Wire, ‘‘Trump Deploys 2,000 Federal Agents to MN for
Month-Long Immigration Crackdown’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘Trumps Deputies Freeze Child Care Payments to
MN Amid Alleged Somali Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
(V)
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘Unearthed Surveillance Video Shows Parents Alleg-
edly Helping With Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Daily Wire, ‘‘Venezuela Has Been Dealt With, Somali Scammers
Should Be Next’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, CNN Politics, ‘‘Victims ‘Shocked’ After Biden Grants Clemency
to ‘Kids-For-Cash’ Judge and $54 Million Embezzler’’; submitted by Rep.
Biggs.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘Viral Video’s David Says He Filed Complaint Against
Walz Over Fraud Allegations’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Washington Examiner, ‘‘Walz Appointees Failed to Stop Rampant
Minnesota Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘Walz in 2024 Debate, MN Made It Easier to Get
into Daycare Business’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘Washington Post Calls for Welfare Reform After MN
Fraud Scandal’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, The Blaze, ‘‘What Investigators Still Have Not Asked About MN’s
Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* OpEd, Star Tribune, ‘‘What is the Right Number’’; submitted by Rep.
Biggs.
* Press Release, HOGR Majority, ‘‘Biden Crime Family Pardons Serve
as a Confession of Their Corruption’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Press Release, HHS, ‘‘HHS to Close Biden-Era Loophole That Lets States
Pay Child Care Providers Without Counting Attendance’’; submitted by
Rep. Biggs.
* Report, Just The News, ‘‘Feds Probe Hundreds of Millions in Suspected
Somali Cash in Luggage Leaving MN Airport’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* X Post, ‘‘Oversight Project’’; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, American Experiment, ‘‘Child Care Welfare Fraud’’; submitted
by Rep. Burlison.
* Article, NYP, ‘‘Former Homeland Security Agent Claims Prosecutors Ig-
nored MN Day Care Fraud Cases’’; submitted by Rep. Burlison.
* Report, Office of the Legislative Auditor, ‘‘Child Care Assistance Pro-
gram, Assessment of Fraud Allegations’’; submitted by Rep. Burlison.
* Report, MN House Research, ‘‘The Child Care Assistance Program’’; sub-
mitted by Rep. Burlison.
* US District Court for the District of MN, ‘‘Application to Execute Search
Warrant on Ultimate Health Services LLC’’; submitted by Rep. Comer.
* MN OLA, ‘‘Audit of MN DHS Behavior Health Administration Grants’’;
submitted by Rep. Comer.
* Article, Breitbart, ‘‘Database Searches Show Somali Fraudsters Funding
Democrat Politicians’’; submitted by Rep. Crane.
* Article, CNBC, ‘‘Health Care Fraudster Philip Esformes is Latest Trump
Clemency Recipient to be Arrested’’; submitted by Rep. Crockett.
* Article, The Palm Beach Post, ‘‘Trump Commutes Sentence of Dr.
Salomon Melgen after Medicare Fraud Conviction’’; submitted by Rep.
Crockett.
* Article, Truthout, ‘‘Trump Grants Clemency to Executive Who Led $205M
Medicare Fraud Scheme’’; submitted by Rep. Crockett.
* Article, McKnight’s Long-Term Care News, ‘‘Trump Pardons Nursing
Home Owner and Supporter Convicted of $7M Tax Evasion’’; submitted
by Rep. Crockett.
(VI)
* Letter, from Whistleblowers, Requesting Congressional Oversight; sub-
mitted by Rep. Donalds.
* Article, American Experiment, ‘‘Feeding Our Future—Keith Ellison
caught on tape!’’; submitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Article, City Journal, ‘‘It’s Not ‘Racist’ to Notice Somali Fraud’’; sub-
mitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Article, New York Post, ‘‘Minnesota whistleblowers being ‘electronically
surveilled’ after reporting fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Fischbach.
* Letter, from DHS Whistleblowers; submitted by Rep. Fischbach.
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘Why Did a Charity Tied to Casey DeSantis
Suddenly Get a $10 Million Boost’’; submitted by Rep. Frost.
* Article, Minnesota Reformer, ‘‘A Somali-American Former Investigator—
Why You’re Hearing About Fraud in My Community’’; submitted by Rep.
Gill.
* Article, MN Star Tribune, ‘‘Is the Walz Administration Finally Awake
About MN Fraud’’; submitted by Rep. Gill.
* Article, City Journal, ‘‘The Largest Funder of Al-Shabaab is the Min-
nesota Taxpayer’’; submitted by Rep. Gill.
* Article, FoxNews, ‘‘Comer Vows Minnesota Fraud Probe Will Expand
to Other States Amid Mounting Scrutiny’’; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, Congresswoman Michelle Fischbach, ‘‘Legislators Blast DHS for
Revelations it had Contracts With Feeding Our Future Fraudsters’’; sub-
mitted by Rep. Mace.
* Letter, January 6, 2026, from MN DHS IG, to Chair Robbins; submitted
by Rep. Mfume.
* Article, MN Star Tribune, ‘‘Contrary to Trump’s claims, Somalis add
$8B to MN economy’’; submitted by Rep. Pressley.
* Report, ‘‘Trump’s Clemency Gap: How Trump’s Pardons are Ignoring
the People Who Need Them the Most’’; submitted by Rep. Pressley.
* Article, The New York Times, ‘‘Health Dept. Freezes $10 Billion in Fund-
ing to 5 Democratic States’’; submitted by Rep. Simon.
* Article, The Intercept, ‘‘Minnesota Somali Fraud Video Source Decried
‘Demon Muslims’ ’’; submitted by Rep. Tlaib.
* Article, CNN Politics, ‘‘USAID IG Fired Day After Report Critical of
Impacts of Trump Administration’s Dismantling of the Agency’’; submitted
by Rep. Walkinshaw.
The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.
(VII)
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
* Questions for the Record: Mr. Brendan Ballou; submitted by Rep. Shontel
Brown.
* Questions for the Record: Hon. Walter Hudson; submitted by Chairman
James Comer.
* Questions for the Record: Hon. Marion Rarick; submitted by Chairman
James Comer.
* Questions for the Record: Hon. Kristin Robbins; submitted by Chairman
James Comer.
* Questions for the Record: Hon. Kristin Robbins; submitted by Rep. Mi-
chael Turner.
These documents were submitted after the hearing, and may be available
upon request.
(VIII)
OVERSIGHT OF FRAUD AND MISUSE OF
FEDERAL FUNDS IN MINNESOTA: PART I
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 7, 2026
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in room
HVC–210, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Hon. James Comer [Chair-
man of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Comer, Jordan, Turner, Gosar, Foxx,
Grothman, Cloud, Palmer, Higgins, Sessions, Biggs, Mace, Fallon,
Donalds, Perry, Timmons, Burchett, Boebert, Luna, Langworthy,
Burlison, Crane, Jack, McGuire, Gill, Garcia, Norton, Lynch,
Krishnamoorthi, Khanna, Mfume, Stansbury, Frost, Lee, Casar,
Crockett, Randall, Subramanyam, Ansari, Bell, Simon, Min,
Walkinshaw, Pressley, and Tlaib.
Also present: Representatives Emmer, Stauber, Fischbach, and
Finstad.
Chairman COMER. The hearing on the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform will come to order. I want to welcome ev-
eryone here today.
Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any time.
I now recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JAMES COMER
REPRESENTATIVE FROM KENTUCKY
Good morning. Today, the House Oversight Committee is holding
its first hearing on the massive fraud in Minnesota’s social services
program. Minnesota social services, which are funded by you, the
American taxpayer, are being ripped off. The most vulnerable are
suffering as a result. Federal prosecutors estimate that these crimi-
nals have stolen at least $9 billion. The fraudsters, many of whom
are from Minnesota’s Somali community, have stolen from pro-
grams meant to feed needy kids, provide services to autistic chil-
dren, house low-income and disabled Americans, and provide
healthcare to vulnerable Medicaid recipients. Fraudsters like these
take millions to enrich themselves while providing nothing, over-
stating or outright faking the services.
How many children have gone hungry because fraudsters stole
money that was intended to provide them with food? How many
autistic children were denied services because fraudsters instead
(1)
2
sent this money overseas? How many low-income seniors, people
with disabilities, or those with mental illnesses were denied access
to housing because fraudsters drained resources and pocketed the
money for themselves?
The breadth and depth of this fraud is breathtaking, and I fear
that this is just the tip of the iceberg.
The U.S. Department of Justice is already investigating another
Minnesota service program after a disabled man, battling drug ad-
diction, under the care of a fraudulent full-time provider, died be-
cause of neglect. Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Elli-
son, and Minnesota’s Democrat leadership have either been asleep
at the wheel or complicit in these crimes.
How could they allow this massive fraud to go on for years? This
is why we are here today. We must expose this theft of taxpayer
dollars and hold everybody accountable who let it happen.
Today we are joined by witnesses from Minnesota State House
of Representatives who have been fighting this fight for years.
These legislators are on the front lines, uncovering fraud in Min-
nesota social services programs day in and day out, and trying to
get their state agencies to fix it. Thank you all for what you are
doing to uncover the truth.
This is not just a Minnesota problem. It is a problem for tax-
payers across the United States. About 35 percent of Minnesota’s
budget comes from Federal grants; 35 percent of Minnesota’s budg-
et comes from Federal grants.
Hardworking Americans pay those taxes, and that money is
being funneled to fraudsters, funding luxury homes, fancy cars, and
vacations abroad. Some of it is even allegedly going overseas to
support terrorists.
And, yet, Governor Walz, Attorney General Ellison, and Min-
nesota Democrats failed to act despite countless warnings. They
failed Minnesotans, and all Americans, handing millions of tax-
payer dollars to fraudsters. They failed children and others in Min-
nesota. They failed their own state employees, some of whom have
come forward as whistleblowers. These whistleblowers have told us
that the Walz Administration retaliated against employees who
warned and alerted the Administration to the fraud occurring with-
in these social services programs. Again, Governor Walz accused
employees, who were simply doing their jobs, of racism,
Islamophobia, and threatened surveillance to silence them.
President Trump and his Administration are taking a whole-of-
government approach and prosecuting these fraudsters. To date,
the U.S. Department of Justice has charged 98 defendants in Min-
nesota fraud-related cases, 85 of whom are of Somali descent; 64
have already been convicted.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is on the ground con-
ducting investigations of suspected fraud sites in Minnesota.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has frozen
childcare payments and started requiring documentation to prove
entities are indeed providing childcare.
Other Federal agencies are halting grant programs, investigating
public housing fraud, and strengthening program eligibility re-
quirements.
3
The American people demand jail time for those who stole their
hard-earned money and accountability for officials who sat by as
resources were drained.
Congress must ensure there is change and accountability, so this
does not happen again.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. Americans
thank you all for exposing this critical issue.
And, with that, I yield to Ranking Member Garcia for his open-
ing statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER ROBERT GARCIA
REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Chairman Comer. I just want to start
by thanking, of course, our witnesses for being here today and for
all of our Members being back.
We all agree—I think everyone on both sides of the aisle can
agree that fraud is a threat at every level of government, in every
private sector business, and to every single American. Fraud exists
everywhere. When I was mayor of my hometown in Long Beach, we
worked for better and more efficient government and took on fraud
whenever it existed and wherever it appeared to protect taxpayers.
It is something that all of us take seriously every single day. When
we find fraud, we should punish people and those that are commit-
ting it against the American public, especially when it damages
services that people rely on.
Now, what we should not do is use fraud as an excuse to rip
away aid from innocent people who follow the rules and need help
in our society. We should fight fraud when people rip off programs
designed to help working families. And, also, we should fight fraud
when large corporations and wealthy individuals dodge their own
taxes and rig the system for their own benefit. And, especially, we
should fight fraud when figures in our government, particularly
those in power within the White House or agencies, get rich and
profit from their offices.
Fraud is never acceptable, and it undermines public trust, who-
ever commits it. But let us remember that some of the worst fraud
and corruption is actually found at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Re-
publicans like to talk about fraud in states with Democratic Gov-
ernors, oftentimes exclusively. But Republicans also have a Presi-
dent who has pardoned or reduced jail time for 25 criminals con-
victed of fraud in this year alone. Now, some of these fraudsters
have made also huge campaign contributions to Donald Trump.
And, worst of all, Trump’s pardons mean that these criminals can
avoid paying back more than $1 billion which they owe their vic-
tims and dwarfs much of the fraud that the House Majority wants
to talk about today.
This is actually the opposite of accountability. Instead, the House
Majority wants to excuse and cut programs, which they have done
from the start. Now, Donald Trump’s signature law cut money for
healthcare and food programs. Medicaid and CHIP help almost half
the kids in the United States see a doctor. And that, we lost, of
course, a trillion dollars in those programs. Over ten million people
could lose healthcare. Trump’s law also cut 40 million people who
4
use SNAP. And this includes, by the way, one out of every five
kids. And this is happening not just in Minnesota.
The President plans to freeze more than ten billion for childcare
subsidies, social services, and cash support for low-income families
in Minnesota, New York, Colorado, Illinois, and my home State of
California. Of course, we know these states have Democratic Gov-
ernors that Donald Trump wants to punish. And we should look at
those consequences if we want to talk about fraud.
In Minnesota, which we are talking about today, Donald Trump
is removing childcare funding for the entire state. That frozen
funding provides childcare for over 18,000 kids. These kids did not
commit fraud. So, I want to know why they should be punished.
Last night, he said he is withholding all, possibly, Medicaid funds
from Minnesota, which could harm one in five residents. Now, in
New York, another state he is threatening, that is over 66,000 in-
nocent kids while pardoning, of course, 25 fraudsters and robbing
victims of over $1 billion.
Donald Trump should have to face the kids and parents who will
be hurt even though they have done nothing wrong. I want to know
what the President and the House majority expect the parents of
these kids to do.
Many do not seem to care. He wants to pardon and protect more
rich crooks and fraudsters who have robbed over a billion dollars
from innocent people.
Now, in California, in my home state, this threatens over 176,000
kids—176,000 kids—while he continues, of course, to pardon
fraudsters and connected folks that have donated immense
amounts of money to his campaign.
Now, this hurts not just Democratic families but Republican fam-
ilies. It is innocent kids, regardless of political party, who need
childcare. We are in an affordability crisis, and the Majority is not
going after the real fraud being committed to the American public.
Now, in Illinois, he has threatened funding for more than 62,000
kids—62,000 kids. And, finally, in Colorado, the other state that he
is going after, more than 16,000 kids will lose funding.
But we know, of course, that the President will let his friends get
away with crime. And I want to point out one last thing which is
so important.
While Donald Trump attacks these states, the Wall Street Jour-
nal on Monday reported a massive Mississippi scandal. Mississippi,
of course, is not on Trump’s list. We do not have witnesses from
Mississippi here today. Oversight Republicans are not calling in
Governor Tate. And I think the question is why? We have real
fraud happening yet there is zero interest, apparently, in what is
happening here in Mississippi and other places.
Republicans want to cut benefits and attack states with Demo-
cratic Governors. And, what it has done, particularly in places like
Minnesota, it has unleashed bigotry and hate. Minnesota childcare
centers have become the target of harassment and even vandalism
and theft. Parents are afraid to drop their kids off in the morning
and go to work.
This is an opportunity, again, to attack for the House Majority
and smear innocent people without evidence. If we cared about
fraud, we would be starting at the very top. This is critical for the
5
country and to actually take on fraud and abuse and the fraudsters
that are being pardoned across the United States. Mr. Chairman,
I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
I would like to now welcome our witnesses here today. First, we
have Kristin Robbins, Chairwoman of the Fraud Prevention and
State Agency Oversight Policy Committee and Representative for
District 37A in the Minnesota House of Representatives. Welcome.
Next, we have Walter Hudson, a member of the Fraud Preven-
tion and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee and Representa-
tive from Minnesota’s District 30A.
Next, we have Marion Rarick, a member of Fraud Prevention
and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee and Representative
for District 29B in Minnesota.
Last, we have Brendan Ballou, a former special counsel at the
Department of Justice.
Thank you all for joining us, and we look very forward to your
testimony today. This is an issue the American people are very in-
terested in.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses will please stand
and raise their right hand.
Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give
is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. Let the record show that the witnesses an-
swered in the affirmative.
Thank you all, and you may take a seat.
We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your tes-
timony. Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your writ-
ten statements, and they will appear in full in the hearing record.
Please limit your oral statements to 5 minutes. As a reminder,
please press the button on the microphone in front of you so that
it is on and the Members can hear you. When you begin to speak,
the light in front of you will turn green. After 4 minutes, the light
will turn yellow. When the red light comes on, your 5 minutes have
expired, and we would ask that you please wrap up.
I now recognize Representative Robbins for her opening state-
ment.
STATEMENT OF HON. KRISTIN ROBBINS
REPRESENTATIVE (37A)
MINNESOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
CHAIR, FRAUD PREVENTION AND STATE AGENCY
OVERSIGHT POLICY COMMITTEE
Ms. ROBBINS. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members.
Thank you for inviting us to testify.
As Chair of the Fraud Prevention Committee in Minnesota, I
have been working to uncover the massive fraud under Tim Walz,
propose solutions, and hold state agencies accountable. Today I will
highlight the scale of the problem, outline the work our Committee
is doing to fight the fraud, and provide a road map for other states
on how to detect and stop fraud.
6
Minnesota is one of the highest taxed states in the Nation, and
hardworking Minnesotans have been told that they do not pay
their fair share for years. In truth, Minnesotans pay much more in
taxes than in other states. And, when they pay their taxes, they
expect that their money is going to things that help our commu-
nities: roads, schools, healthcare, and law enforcement. They do not
want their tax dollars absconded by criminals to buy resorts and
apartment buildings in Kenya, property in Turkey, and luxury
homes and cars in the United States.
Tim Walz and his Administration have willfully turned a blind
eye to crime in the face of countless whistleblower and auditor re-
ports as well as stories by local investigative journalists and the
Center of the American Experiment.
These are actual crimes that must be punished. They are crimes
against our moral values and erode trust in government. The time
for accountability and justice is here.
First, we are unearthing staggering amounts of fraud in Min-
nesota. As far back as 2014, there were credible whistleblower alle-
gations of millions in daycare fraud. Instead of shutting it down,
the state minimized whistleblower reports and allowed fraud to
grow. Unfortunately, childcare fraud was just the tip of the iceberg.
Since 2019, Tim Walz and Minnesota Democrats have allowed
fraud to absolutely explode in Minnesota. There has been more
than $300 million in the Feeding our Future child nutrition pro-
gram scandal. And the Feeding our Future prosecutions revealed
that as many as half of those indicted also ran other Medicaid-
funded programs. Yet, despite this being known back in 2023, Tim
Walz and his agencies have done nothing to stop those defendants
from getting additional state money.
We have now found fraud in multiple Medicaid programs, includ-
ing autism centers, sober homes, non-emergency medical transpor-
tation, integrated community supports, and housing stabilization.
Just last month, our Committee held a hearing on credible allega-
tions of fraud in two new areas: adult day services and assisted liv-
ing.
First U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson, the leading prosecutor in
these cases from the Biden Administration and the Trump Admin-
istration, says the fraud could be an astronomical $9 billion. In the
face of mounting reports and literal criminal indictments and con-
victions, the Walz Administration has repeatedly and publicly de-
nied or downplayed the fraud. Just last January, the Commissioner
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Jodi Harpstead,
who had been on the job for five and a half years, said, ‘‘There are
a lot more rumors of fraud than there is actual fraud.’’
You cannot make this up. The Walz Administration has been
gaslighting Minnesotans on the scale of the fraud problem for
years. In response, when Republicans took control—or ended Dem-
ocrat control of the Minnesota House last year, we created the
Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee. Since
last February, we have held 15 hearings where we have grilled offi-
cials, exposed new areas of fraud, and repeatedly flagged failures
in internal controls.
7
I authored a new law to expand whistleblower protection, and we
created a portal, mnfraud.com, resulting in a surge of new whistle-
blower reports that our amazing staff is still working through.
Under the leadership of our Vice Chair, Patti Anderson, we
passed a bipartisan bill in the Senate to create an independent Of-
fice of Inspector General. When it got to the House, Democrats
killed it because the DHS Commissioner testified against it.
The Tim Walz Administration has utterly failed to protect Min-
nesota taxpayers and vulnerable citizens, ignoring years of credible
reports and retaliating against those who spoke up, often by claim-
ing they were racist or Islamophobic. Tim Walz and the Democrats
have repeatedly protected their political base at the expense of all
Minnesotans. Other states should learn from the failures of the
Walz Administration. So, I will give you a quick road map on how
to find and stop fraud.
First, culture matters. Fraud flourishes when leaders ignore it
and criminals see they can get away with it.
Second, fraud flourishes when basic internal controls are not fol-
lowed. This is not complicated.
Third, you have to look at the interconnections of relationships
in businesses and multiple program areas in Medicaid. It is a huge
red flag that has been ignored in our state.
Finally, it is important to say what is true and to stand up
against fake allegations of racism or Islamophobia. Crime is crime
no matter who is committing it. It is true that the majority of the
fraud in Minnesota has taken place in the Somali community. And
it is also true that some of our best whistleblowers are from the
Somali community. Democrats refuse to acknowledge this truth,
and that has enabled criminals to steal billions and hurt our vul-
nerable citizens.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to share the les-
sons from Minnesota and for your help in investigating these
crimes. The time for justice and accountability is now.
Chairman COMER. Thank you. I now recognize Representative
Hudson for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER HUDSON
REPRESENTATIVE (30A)
MINNESOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MEMBER, FRAUD PREVENTION AND
STATE AGENCY OVERSIGHT POLICY COMMITTEE
Mr. HUDSON. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today for the
record. I am Minnesota State Representative Walter Hudson, a sec-
ond term member who sits on our House Fraud Prevention and
State Agency Oversight Committee.
The recent national conversation about fraud in Minnesota has
been fraught with distractions, diverting from critical concerns re-
garding process, policy, and oversight, to sideshow concerns about
personalities and partisan politics. My role here today is to cut
through all of that and provide you with a clear picture of a culture
which has developed over many years around the several generous
benefit programs which Minnesota provides to our residents.
8
Well-documented oversight failures have led to a lack of program
integrity, creating incentives for people to monetize programs be-
yond their legislative intent, to turn benefits into business. Con-
trary to the claim just made by the Ranking Member that there is
no evidence of this fraud, attached to my written testimony you
will find a document which collates several reports made over the
past 15 years by Minnesota’s nonpartisan Office of Legislative
Auditor along with transcripts of each of our hearings from the
Fraud Committee, where we heard directly from staff and leaders
within the state agencies which administer these programs.
Here is what that record indicates: Within the State of Min-
nesota, government oversight has been unable to keep up with pro-
gram expansion due to a combination of factors. One, rapid expan-
sion of funding and provider participation. Two, payment systems
that prioritize access and speed. Three, verification mechanisms
that occur after funds are distributed. Four, oversight capacity that
does not scale with spending. And, five, diffuse accountability
across agencies and contractors.
This combination of factors has fostered a booming new sector of
the economy that relies upon the continuation of and expansion of
government programs to fuel private sector profits.
I want to be clear: Even when the law is being followed precisely,
by every jot and tittle, incentives still exist to abuse these pro-
grams and waste taxpayer dollars by diverting funding to profit
centers rather than providing a safety net for those in temporary
need.
Now, criminal fraud is rampant. Deputy U.S. Attorney Joe
Thompson serving the district of Minnesota has said that he could
keep a thousand prosecutors busy. But he is limited to a mere 25,
only five of which are tasked with building fraud cases. He esti-
mates that the total amount of criminal fraud over five years may
reach $9 billion, which is fully one-half of the money that has been
directed to these programs by the state.
While Governor Tim Walz and other stakeholders dispute that
assessment, the point I wish to emphasize is this: Whatever the ac-
tual number is, the full scope of the problem is not just criminal
fraud but a culture of profiting from government programs in per-
petuity, not as a safety net but as an industry. I have personally
met and had discussions with folks who identify themselves as con-
sultants for multiple entities accepting government benefits. They
have made a career out of showing people how to leverage the gaps
in government oversight to maximize benefit payments.
Now, such conduct may not actually break the law. And that is
the point. We have a system whereby an entire industry can oper-
ate under the color of law, raking in tremendous profits for individ-
uals all while having no incentive to save the taxpayer money or
lift legitimate beneficiaries out of need.
Instead, as the market for funneling benefits into businesses in-
creases, so too does the perceived need for benevolent services. If
nothing changes, if oversight is not tightened, if incentives are not
changed, spending on these programs will only continue to increase
with no commensurate increase in either public good or public con-
fidence in our governing institutions.
9
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony for the
record. I look forward to answering what questions I can.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
I now recognize Representative Rarick for her opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARION RARICK
REPRESENTATIVE (29B)
MINNESOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MEMBER, FRAUD PREVENTION AND
STATE AGENCY OVERSIGHT POLICY COMMITTEE
Ms. RARICK. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members. For the
record, my name is Marion Rarick, and I am currently serving in
the Minnesota House of Representatives in House District 29B. I
am a member on the Minnesota House Fraud Prevention and State
Agency Oversight Committee, which was recently formed in Janu-
ary ’25.
I was first asked to serve on the Committee in January—on Jan-
uary 4, and soon after, the five Republican members began to meet.
During one of those discussions, I was asked to reach out to the
Department of Human Services whistleblowers on X, now called
Minnesota Staff Fraud Reporting Commentary.
I had been following them in the previous year. I reached out
through a direct tweet on X on January 16, and the very same day
I got a response back that, yes, they would be willing to speak to
the Fraud Prevention Committee.
Since that first contact, Chair Robbins and I and Representative
Hudson have had multiple conference calls with them, and we have
had one in-person meeting. At that meeting, there were both
former and current employees.
I have continued to message with them very often, sometimes
daily, and their collective message has been completely consistent.
Instead of focusing on fraudsters, DHS leadership instead focused
its surveillance on employees. Since then, their expressed fear of
retaliation has intensified under an avalanche of fraud in Min-
nesota. Their numbers have grown from 480 DHS employees, both
current and former, to over 1,000 across multiple state agencies.
They have told me repeatedly how grateful they are to the House
Fraud Prevention Committee for focusing our attention on fraud in
the state programs, using their inside information while keeping
them completely protected. They have explained that they live in
a constant state of fear of retaliation. One only has to look at what
happened to Faye Bernstein to understand why. In a very recent
Newsweek article dated December 13 of 2025, Ms. Bernstein, a
former compliance specialist, stated, ‘‘Minnesota DHS functions in
the opposite manner as you would think. Employees who suggest
improvements or, heaven forbid, report fraud then face significant
retaliation. The messenger is shot.’’
In 2019, Bernstein said she alerted Minnesota DHS officials to
sloppy contracting practices that were not legally compliant. But it
is not what most people would even consider fraud. She says she
was later escorted out of the building, faced lengthy investigation,
got trespassed from all DHS-owned and leased properties, and re-
ceived involuntary transfer to another state agency. So, she says,
10
‘‘So, today, if someone asked me should I report fraud within DHS,
I say no, no, no. It is career suicide plus a whole lot more.’’
So, let us talk about that, ‘‘plus a whole lot more.’’ In our face-
to-face meetings with a group of whistleblowers, they reveal that
retaliation now includes threats of being fired with cause, which
means you do not get unemployment insurance in the State of Min-
nesota, being blacklisted from all state agencies, and I would note,
most likely, our largest counties as well, which are Democrat run,
and then there was a veiled threat of the use of military intel-
ligence against them.
They later informed me that it was discovered that in some tar-
geted employees’ or suspected whistleblowers’ personnel files were
pictures of their homes and their cars. They also described that su-
pervisors asked them questions about their families that, to them,
felt like a threat. One example was ‘‘We need to know where your
kids go to school and where their bus stops are.’’
I will also note that whistleblowers we spoke to described many
times that DHS used surveillance programs to surveil employees’
emails and chats and other communications, looking for key words
like fraud, double-billing, underspending, and overpayments.
One example that the whistleblowers let me know about Lieuten-
ant Governor Flanagan—April 12, 2024, Flanagan comes to a DHS
Health and Human Services equity conference at the Heritage Cen-
ter and Brooklyn Center. On stage, Flanagan acknowledges the X
account and the fraud concerns it raised and publicly denounced
the X users and called them weirdos and losers sitting in their
mothers’ basement. This was in a public setting with hundreds of
participants, and it elicited gasps among the crowd. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
I now recognize Mr. Ballou for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF MR. BRENDAN BALLOU (MINORITY WITNESS)
FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Mr. BALLOU. Thank you. My name is Brendan Ballou. I am a
former Federal prosecutor and a native Minnesotan.
Like all Minnesotans, like all Americans who have heard this
story, I am deeply distressed by the fraud on the state social serv-
ice programs. Most notably, in 2022, the Department of Justice in-
dicted 47 people for stealing an estimated $246 million in funds
meant to feed children during the COVID–19 pandemic. As late as
2025, 78 people have been indicted as part of this scheme, and 56
have pleaded guilty. More recently, the Department has charged
over a dozen people for stealing $14 million from a program meant
for children with autism and millions more from a program meant
to help disabled Minnesotans maintain stable housing.
This is heartbreaking for several reasons. At the most basic level,
money meant for the neediest among us—the hungry, the disabled,
the destitute—was stolen. I fear that skepticism of Minnesota’s so-
cial safety net, one of the things that makes the state great, will
grow, and it will be harder to fund these programs in the future.
And I fear that the actions of a few people will be used to demonize
an entire population of Somali and East African Minnesotans who
11
overwhelmingly have made the state more vibrant, more diverse,
and more prosperous.
I also fear the selective interest in fraud in America, because, at
the same time that these crimes are rightly being investigated by
state and Federal authorities, the larger infrastructure for pros-
ecuting fraud and white-collar crime is being dismantled. Let me
give you a few examples.
In February 2025, the Department of Justice paused enforcement
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits foreign brib-
ery, and criminal violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act
which, as the name suggests, prohibits acting as a secret agent of
a foreign power.
Between February and April of last year, the Department dis-
banded its KleptoCapture Task Force, which enforced sanctions
against Russian oligarchs and the National Cryptocurrency En-
forcement Team. And, last year, the Department forced out most
of the lawyers of the Public Integrity Section, which prosecutes
crimes by government officials, announced plans to dismantle the
Tax Division, which prosecutes tax evasion, and shuttered the FBI
task force that investigated congressional misconduct.
More than just dismantling infrastructure for pursuing violations
of the law, the government is, for favored defendants, appearing to
enable it. In 2024, the Justice Department indicted Andrew
Wiederhorn, the CEO of a casual fast-food chain, for allegedly
stealing $47 million from his own company. After his business do-
nated $100,000 to the Trump inaugural committee, his case was
dropped, and the line-level prosecutor on his case was fired.
In 2021, the Department sued Boeing for deceiving the govern-
ment about the software that caused two plane crashes, killing 346
people. After donating $1 million to the inaugural committee, Boe-
ing negotiated a favorable deferred prosecution agreement that the
judge overseeing the case said, quote, ‘‘fails to secure the necessary
accountability to ensure the safety of the flying public.’’ But he felt
compelled by precedent to accept it, nevertheless.
The examples continue. Banks that contributed to the inaugural
committee had litigations against them for violating consumer fi-
nancial protection laws dropped, and so, too, did cryptocurrency
companies that were investigated and sued by the Securities and
Exchange Commission and who contributed to the inaugural com-
mittee.
Crucially, those crypto companies that did not donate to the com-
mittee or other affiliated entities remain defendants of the govern-
ment.
The scale of these frauds involve millions stolen and hundreds
killed, and yet they have received a fraction of the attention of the
fraud that happened in Minnesota. This concerns me because we
are both dismantling our infrastructure for fighting fraud and pro-
viding a road map for how those fraudsters who are prosecuted can
buy their way out of justice.
While we need to pursue the fraud we are seeing in Minnesota
social safety programs for all the reasons I said, because it is the
weakest among us who are being harmed, we cannot selectively
show an interest in fraud. If we do, we put some people, the very
12
powerful and the very rich, beyond the reach of the law. Thank
you.
Chairman COMER. Thank you all for your opening statements.
We will now begin the questioning portion of the hearing. And
the Chair recognizes Mr. Gill from Texas for the first question.
Mr. GILL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this
hearing so expeditiously.
We all know this is an important issue not just in terms of wel-
fare fraud but also immigration more broadly. So, we appreciate it.
And thank you for the witnesses for taking the time to come here.
I want to start with you, Mr. Ballou. Again, thank you for being
here. Let me ask you, does large-scale Somali immigration make
Minnesota stronger or weaker?
Mr. BALLOU. Certainly stronger.
Mr. GILL. Certainly stronger. Do you know what percentage of
Somali-headed households in Minnesota are on food stamps?
Mr. BALLOU. No.
Mr. GILL. 54 percent. Do you know what that number is for na-
tive Minnesota-headed households?
Mr. BALLOU. Well, to be clear, a majority of the——
Mr. GILL. It is seven—it is seven percent. There is a big dif-
ference between 54 percent and seven percent; is there not?
Mr. BALLOU. Excuse me, sir. Could I—could I answer the ques-
tion?
Mr. GILL. Let me move on. We have got a lot of questions here.
What percentage of Somali-headed households in Minnesota are on
Medicaid?
Mr. BALLOU. I do not know.
Mr. GILL. It is 73 percent. Do you know what that number is for
Minnesota-native households?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, you are using the phrase ‘‘Minnesota-native
households’’ but the majority——
Mr. GILL. The number—the number is 18 percent. That is quite
an astounding difference, I think we——
Mr. BALLOU. Can I answer the question, please?
Mr. GILL. Let me ask you one more, and then we can go on to
that. What percentage of Somali-headed households are on welfare
in general?
Mr. BALLOU. I do not know.
Mr. GILL. It is 81 percent. What about—let me just ask you, after
ten years of being in the United States, what percentage of Somali
immigrant households continue to be on welfare?
Mr. BALLOU. I do not know.
Mr. GILL. The number is 78 percent. So, even after ten years, 78
percent of Somali immigrant households continue to be on welfare.
Do you know what that number is for native Minnesota-headed
households?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, you are using——
Mr. GILL. Non-Somali immigrant headed households.
Mr. BALLOU. If I could just to answer the question.
Mr. GILL. Go for it.
Mr. BALLOU. You are using the phrase ‘‘native’’ Minnesotans. The
majority of Somali Minnesotans are as Minnesotan as any of us.
13
They were born in the United States. It is only 8,000 of the 108,000
Somali——
Mr. GILL. Nevertheless, the welfare usage is astoundingly dif-
ferent. Let me ask you again, does that make Minnesota stronger
or weaker?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, I would like the opportunity to answer the
question here.
Mr. GILL. Go for it.
Mr. BALLOU. So, again, the majority of Somalian Minnesotans
are born in the United States. As I understand it——
Mr. GILL. Okay. Well, what—what percentage of——
Mr. BALLOU. Again, can I——
Mr. GILL [continuing]. Of working age Somalians, who have been
in the United States for ten years or more, ten years or more, how
many of them speak English very well?
Mr. BALLOU. I do not know.
Mr. GILL. About half. The answer is about half. That seems pret-
ty low, doesn’t it?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, I keep trying——
Mr. GILL. That does not sound like something that makes our
country stronger to me. And I think most Americans would agree
with me on that. I need to move on.
Ms. Robbins, when would you say we, concretely, knew that
widespread welfare fraud was occurring in Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. There have been reports since 2009 from the Office
of Legislative Auditor. I would say the credible reports on childcare
fraud started surfacing 2011 to 2013.
Mr. GILL. So, for over a decade.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. GILL. When do you think Governor Walz knew about this
fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. From the very beginning. He was running for Gov-
ernor in 2018 when there were prosecutions going on, when there
was an OLA report, active cases in the news all the time.
Mr. GILL. And what was the Walz Administration’s response?
Ms. ROBBINS. They actually did nothing when they got into office.
And Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan had been on the Com-
mittee in the legislature that had hearings on childcare fraud. And,
when they got into office, they did put $5 million into—a little
more money, but nothing changed.
Mr. GILL. But nothing—and let me ask you, Mr. Hudson—thank
you for being here. Did those who commit this fraud, do they typi-
cally vote for Republicans or Democrats, in your opinion?
Mr. HUDSON. In my opinion—thank you for qualifying like that—
I would say they most definitely overwhelmingly vote for Demo-
crats.
Mr. GILL. Do they typically donate to Republicans or Democrats?
Mr. HUDSON. Not to my knowledge. They——
Mr. GILL. In your opinion?
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. Do not donate to Republicans; they do-
nate to Democrats, in my opinion, yes.
Mr. GILL. Yes. So, would you say the Somali population is an im-
portant demographic for Democrats to win over politically?
Mr. HUDSON. Unquestionably.
14
Mr. GILL. Got it. And do you think it would have hurt Democrats’
political standing with the Somali population to investigate this
fraud?
Mr. HUDSON. Very clearly.
Mr. GILL. Got it. So, in other words, you are saying that there
was a political incentive to cover up widespread Somali fraud. Is
that right?
Mr. HUDSON. 100 percent.
Mr. GILL. Let me ask all three of you, did the Walz Administra-
tion and Democrats intentionally, in your opinion, overlook this
fraud, while it was happening, for political gain? I will start with
you, Ms. Robbins.
Ms. ROBBINS. Absolutely. We have credible whistleblower reports
that the Department of Human Services Administration up to the
Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Commissioner met with
a group called the Minnesota Minority Child Care Association mul-
tiple times and that they were trying to weaken protections. We
wanted——
Mr. GILL. Right.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. We had several changes we wanted to
do, and they opposed all of them.
Mr. GILL. And Mr. Hudson and Ms. Rarick, and then my time
is up.
Mr. HUDSON. I would agree.
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely. The whistleblowers confirm it.
Mr. GILL. Got it. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Ranking Member
Garcia.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you.
I just want to clarify one thing. I just want to be very clear that
a vast majority of those Somali Minnesotans are United States citi-
zens. And Somali Americans have as much right to access those
services or any Somalis as United States Members of Congress.
They have the same right to access services, and we are talking
about U.S. citizens.
Let me also just clarify, Mr. Hudson, you said in your opening
remarks that I had said that no fraud exists, and I think—you can
feel free to run the tape. That is not exactly not what I said. What
I have been talking about, which is important for us to remember,
is that wherever fraud exists, we should take it on. And we should
hold folks accountable. And, when people commit fraud and people
get hurt, there is going to be repercussions as there should be. We
can all agree to that.
We want to hold fraudsters accountable and want to protect the
victims and innocent people so those that can access services and
continue to access services across this country. That is how it
should work.
But we also know that is not how it should work according to
President Trump. Now, let us actually talk about real fraud and
some fraudsters. Now, we all know that, recently, here in Florida,
President Trump granted a get-out-of-jail-free pardon to Philip
Esformes. Now, Mr. Esformes is a nursing home mogul convicted
of schemes to defraud Medicare and Medicaid of $1.3 billion. Where
is that hearing? This guy just did not steal from taxpayers. He took
15
advantage of thousands of people, admitting them to nursing
homes and living facilities that could not help them.
His network of doctors gave out dangerous and harmful treat-
ments and prescribing opioids to drug addicts just to make more
money. In 2019, when Esformes was sentenced, Trump’s own DOJ
issued a press release that quoted ‘‘The man behind one of the big-
gest healthcare frauds in history will be spending 20 years in pris-
on’’—20 years in prison the DOJ said. Just 14 months later, Donald
Trump let him walk free with a pardon.
In October of this year, on his 56th birthday, Esformes was ar-
rested on domestic violence charges.
Let us look at another case, another Trump case. Joseph
Schwartz, he was sentenced for taking advantage of nursing home
residents and workers and defrauding the government of $38 mil-
lion. Where is that hearing? Schwartz paid lobbyists almost a mil-
lion to secure a pardon from the President, and it worked. In No-
vember of this last year, a full and unconditional pardon was
granted by President Trump for this enormous amount of fraud.
Now, let us look at Paul Walczak, a tax cheat whose crimes cost
taxpayers almost $1.1 billion, dwarfing what we are talking about
today, as he made lavish purchases like a $1 million luxury yacht.
Now, Mr. Walczak was supposed to spend 18 months in prison, a
fraudster who we want to go after. He should have been held ac-
countable for his crimes. And he was supposed to pay $4.4 million
back to the taxpayers.
While this pardon application was pending, his mom was invited
to a $1 million per person candlelight dinner at Mar-a-Lago with
President Trump. She attended, and less than three weeks later,
her son received a full and unconditional pardon.
Now, I am assuming that our witnesses here today would think
this is horrific fraud and would disagree with these pardons. I
would like to just—do you agree with this pardon? I would like to
begin with our witnesses.
Ms. ROBBINS. Sir, I have not looked at the facts of the case or
the law. So, I cannot make a statement on that.
Mr. GARCIA. You cannot make a statement on these pardons. You
have not read anything about them in the news, apparently.
Ms. ROBBINS. I have not.
Mr. GARCIA. These are pardons to criminals and fraudsters that
our witnesses clearly have no interest in.
Now, in Trump’s America, rich people can rip innocent people off
whenever they want and get a pardon. And the answer to fraud
here is to cutoff benefits to innocent people. Most of these folks are
innocent people and kids who just need their services.
Donald Trump’s decision to freeze $10 billion in social services
funding to five states does not hold criminals accountable. It hurts
the very people who are harmed by fraud in the first place.
Mr. Ballou, just finally, you are from Minnesota yourself. How
are Minnesotans on the ground being hurt by Trump’s political ret-
ribution crusade?
Mr. BALLOU. Well, the practical effect is that the pause on pay-
ments for childcare services and Medicaid services are going to re-
sult in hundreds of thousands of the neediest Minnesotans being
denied, in some cases, literally lifesaving payments.
16
Mr. GARCIA. And, also, as we have been discussing here, there
is a large, of course, immigrant community, a community that
makes Minnesota stronger. Can you tell us how innocent people in
the Somali community are being directly harmed?
Mr. BALLOU. Well, you hear about the threats that are hap-
pening against the Somali community. You are hearing about the
broad demonization that is happening against them in the media
generally. I think, you know, just, I know we are running out of
time here. But, you know, if you look at the statistics, I believe it
is 82 Somali Americans have been indicted so far out of 108,000
Somali Minnesotans in the state overall. That is something like a
0.07 percent criminal rate. You know, when you compare that to
one-third of all Americans have a criminal record, and I think it
is 40 percent, or approximately, of white men under the age of 23
have been arrested, I do not think the statistics really compare.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, sir. And I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, the House Majority Whip
Emmer, Representatives Finstad, Fischbach, and Stauber of Min-
nesota are waived on to the Committee for purpose of questioning
the witnesses at today’s hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
Mrs. LUNA. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes——
Mrs. LUNA. I seek recognition to make two motions for sub-
poenas.
Chairman COMER. I was going to recognize the Whip, but if you
have a motion, or—state your?
Mrs. LUNA. I would like to make a motion to subpoena Neville
Singham, a U.S. billionaire with reported ties to the Chinese Com-
munist Party (CCP), that has been funding extremist organiza-
tions, fueling division and civil unrest in this country, especially re-
garding the ICE riots last summer. As well as, I would like to
make a motion to subpoena the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
CEO Jonathan Greenblatt for stifling free speech by listing the
phrase ‘‘America First’’ as hate speech and Turning Point USA as
a hate group.
Chairman COMER. The motion has been made. The Committee
will hold this motion in abeyance until the end of the Committee
hearing. The Committee will now proceed with today’s hearing.
Mr. LYNCH. Point of order, Mr. Chairman. Will we get a written
copy of that? Because that was a lot to go through.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Yes. We will make—we will work with
Representative Luna and get a copy.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. All right. The Chair now recognizes the Ma-
jority Whip from Minnesota, Mr. Emmer.
Mr. EMMER. Thank you, Chairman Comer, for holding this im-
portant hearing.
As I said on Monday, good riddance to Governor Walz. But he
cannot escape accountability for the estimated $9 billion in fraud.
How did this happen, and where the hell has the Twin Cities
media been? The Star Tribune is complicit. They have had this
story for years, if you just heard, and they refused to report any-
thing on it. In fact, they continue to try and cover up. Our Min-
17
nesota Republican colleagues have demanded answers and account-
ability for years but have seen nothing from Walz, his Administra-
tion, our Democrat colleagues like Tina Smith, Amy Klobuchar,
Ilhan Omar, and Angie Craig, or the worthless Star Tribune.
Thank God for President Donald J. Trump for finally bringing at-
tention to this issue.
Representative Rarick, I am going to begin with you. You have
been working on this issue for years. You have spoken to the whis-
tleblowers personally. Is that correct?
Ms. RARICK. That is correct.
Mr. EMMER. You have an understanding that 1,000 whistle-
blowers running an account on X have come forward to expose
fraud in Minnesota state agencies, and they have been entirely ig-
nored by Tim Walz and have even been retaliated against. Is that
accurate?
Ms. RARICK. That is correct. Even this morning, I got another
message.
Mr. EMMER. Well, in your experience, are their claims credible or
are they politically motivated against Walz?
Ms. RARICK. They are completely credible, not politically moti-
vated.
Mr. EMMER. In fact, many of these are Walz Administration em-
ployees, correct?
Ms. RARICK. They are actually Democrats as well.
Mr. EMMER. Can you quickly give us one example of the retalia-
tion these folks have been facing?
Ms. RARICK. Yes, I can. In my opening statement, I mentioned
that the most severe ones was that they would be fired with cause
so they could not have unemployment insurance, that they would
be blacklisted from all state agencies, and I would bet that it is
also Hennepin County and Ramsey County. As you know, those are
Democrat run. And much, much more.
Mr. EMMER. Based on what you have learned, Representative,
over the last several years, do you have any doubt that Governor
Tim Walz knew about this fraud as it was occurring?
Ms. RARICK. He absolutely knew that it was occurring.
Mr. EMMER. Thank you. The Housing Stability Services Program
was estimated to cost about $2.6 million per year. But before it was
shut down last October, it was on track to run about $122 million
in 2025. In fact, I think they sucked $161 million out of it from the
point it started in 2020 until it was finally shut down. Isn’t that
correct?
Ms. RARICK. That is correct. And Joe Thompson believes that 90
percent of that was fraud.
Mr. EMMER. Yes. The Quality ‘‘Leering’’ Center, as uncovered by
Nick Shirley, received almost $10 million in funding. Is that accu-
rate?
Ms. RARICK. I believe it is.
Mr. EMMER. There are more than 80 autism centers in Min-
nesota under investigation. Is that true?
Ms. RARICK. I believe it is, yes.
Mr. EMMER. It is clear that someone is criminally complicit. You
cannot just let this amount of money get out of your administration
over a period of seven years without knowing. There was a hearing
18
in the state regarding the fraudulent Housing Stabilization Pro-
gram, but before that hearing, Governor Walz fired the official who
was slated to testify so that they could not testify and expose what
was happening under Governor Walz’s watch. Has Governor Walz
or Attorney General Ellison fired anyone else, to your knowledge,
Representative?
Ms. RARICK. Not to my knowledge. And that was Eric Grumdahl.
And his Administration believes that he was—he was not fired. But
I say he was fired because it was too convenient.
Mr. EMMER. Right. Representative Hudson, is it true that 90 per-
cent of the individuals charged, regardless of what your colleague
on the panel just said with his facts and figures, 90 percent of the
individuals charged or indicted with the $250 million Feeding Our
Future COVID fraud are of Somali descent?
Mr. HUDSON. I believe that to be correct.
Mr. EMMER. Are you aware that, in a 2021 video, Mr. Ellison
promised that he would obstruct his own agencies in their inves-
tigation of Somali fraud?
Mr. HUDSON. I am very much aware of that.
Mr. EMMER. It is no wonder that criminals in the Somali commu-
nity felt they were free to steal taxpayer dollars. I am going to ask
you the same question I asked Marion. Do you have any doubt that
Tim Walz knew about this fraud as it was occurring?
Mr. HUDSON. None whatsoever.
Mr. EMMER. Walz and Ellison were protecting fraudsters instead
of investigating them, and it was purposeful. And it is no coinci-
dence that this is occurring largely in the Somali community. Walz
made a sanctuary state—Minnesota a sanctuary state. He gave
free healthcare, free college, and free licenses to illegals. And Walz
looked the other way when Somali immigrants were stealing. Rep-
resentative Robbins, do you have any doubt that Tim Walz knew
about this fraud as it was occurring?
Ms. ROBBINS. None whatsoever.
Mr. EMMER. So, all three of you have no doubt in your minds
that Tim Walz knew about the $9 billion of fraud during his tenure
as Governor and did nothing about it.
It looks like my time is about to expire. And I do want to say
to all of you, on behalf of Minnesota, thank you for being here. And
justice will be served.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Thank you, Mr. Whip.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Norton from Washington, D.C.
Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Federal assistance programs are vital for keeping working fami-
lies afloat and children healthy. Nearly 25 percent of adults and
nearly 50 percent of children rely on Federal assistance, including
childcare funding, Medicaid, and Children’s Health Insurance Pro-
gram and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Fraudsters targeting government programs have a uniquely harm-
ful impact on Americans. They deprive taxpayers of efficient use of
their funds, deprive intended recipients and sometimes the most
vulnerable groups in our society of the services and assistance they
are eligible for. And they reduce the public trust in government.
19
But answers to fraud is not to freeze critical safety net programs
and cause more suffering for Americans who are already struggling
to afford everyday expenses. I have worked with my colleagues on
the Government Operations Subcommittee on ways that Federal
agencies can identify and prevent fraud before payments are made.
My Oversight Committee Democrat colleagues and I are also proud
cosponsors of congressional Min’s Taxpayer Funds Oversight Ac-
countability Act. This legislation would strengthen the ability of
Federal agencies to reliably track Federal funds enabling more effi-
cient analysis to identify and stop fraudsters. We can continue to
reduce fraud and protect funding from bad actors by empowering
oversight bodies like Inspectors General and Government Account-
ability Office, which are often best equipped to investigate red flags
and sound the alarm when there are problems to address. Applying
additional safeguards requires a balanced approach that does not
pull the rug out from under people, including children, who rely on
help these programs provide.
Congress must not allow partisan actors to seize on the misdeeds
of a few in order to gut the vital programs that provide access to
Federal healthcare and special education services, keep American
children fed, and keep American parents to work with the knowl-
edge that their children are safe. And I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Jordan from Ohio.
Mr. JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hudson, who is Salim Said and Aimee Bock?
Mr. HUDSON. I recognize those names as defendants in the Feed-
ing Our Future trial.
Mr. JORDAN. They ran Feeding Our Future. Is that right?
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. And they have been indicted?
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. They have been convicted?
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. And they are in jail waiting sentences. Is that
right?
Mr. HUDSON. As I understand it.
Mr. JORDAN. Okay. I want to go back, because earlier with Mr.
Gill you said that they overlook the fraud. I think it is worse than
that. I think they helped it along. I am going to go to this meeting
that took place—actually, I want to go to March 30, 2021. Is it true
back in March 2021, the Minnesota Department of Education sus-
pended payments to Feeding Our Future? To that program? Is that
right?
Mr. HUDSON. I believe that is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. And then, a month later, they resumed payments.
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. What caused them to change their mind?
Mr. HUDSON. In my opinion, what caused them to change their
mind was pushback from their constituency within the Somali com-
munity who accused the state agencies of being racist.
Mr. JORDAN. But what caused them to stop it in the first place?
Was it whistleblowers coming forward? Was it, like, something is
not right here? What happened?
20
Mr. HUDSON. Apologize for the misunderstanding. The reason
they stopped the funds in the first place is because they had cred-
ible allegations that there was fraud taking place.
Mr. JORDAN. From whistleblowers and others?
Mr. HUDSON. Correct.
Mr. JORDAN. They were just doing their job, looking at—this does
not make sense. We got all these programs, no one is getting fed,
yet money is going out the door like crazy. So, they suspended it.
And then they started it back up, right? Was there any threat of
a lawsuit from the Somali community and folks affiliated with
Feeding Our Future?
Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Jordan, there was more than a threat. They ac-
tually did.
Mr. JORDAN. They did? And what was the alleged claim in that
lawsuit?
Mr. HUDSON. That they were victims of racial discrimination.
Mr. JORDAN. Oh. They played the race card, huh? All this fraud
going on, money going out, and they played the race card.
Now, when I talked about not just overlooking it, there was a
meeting that took place between the Attorney General and affili-
ates of Feeding Our Future. Is that right?
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. And what happened at that meeting? Do we know?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, we do, because we have it on tape. There was
an audio recording made at that meeting that was entered into evi-
dence in the Feeding Our Future trial, and it was later revealed,
through work from Center of the American Experiment, the full re-
cording. And my observations of what took place in that meeting
was that Attorney General Keith Ellison was focused on one thing
and one thing only, and that was keeping these folks in business.
There were no questions that he asked of these folks about how the
kids are doing, the operation, how they are getting fed, who is
being helped. Instead, the focus was entirely on ensuring that the
money continues to flow. And I will add that he went so far as to
say that he was going to fight these people, in reference to the
state agencies. The state agencies are his client.
Mr. JORDAN. Yes. And, when you said money is going to flow, did
money flow to Mr. Ellison’s campaign a couple weeks later from
some of the folks who were in that meeting?
Mr. HUDSON. Sure did.
Mr. JORDAN. Do we know how much that was?
Mr. HUDSON. I do not have that number.
Mr. JORDAN. So, it was not just—was not just overlooking the
fraud. They were actively trying to make sure this program contin-
ued, and then they benefited from that politically with contribution
to their campaign, all in this same year, all in 2021, when this was
all coming to a head. Is that accurate?
Mr. HUDSON. That is my understanding.
Mr. JORDAN. And this fraud is much bigger than this because, as
I look, it is just about—it is, like, six different Federal agencies.
Department of Homeland Security, Health and Human Services,
Small Business Association, Housing Urban Development, Depart-
ment of Labor, Department of Agriculture, in this program and a
bunch of others, they were shaking down the entire Federal Gov-
21
ernment, it looked like. Six different Federal agencies over, I think
you pointed out, over the last 15 years?
Mr. HUDSON. That is correct.
Mr. JORDAN. And not only are the Administration, the Democrat
Administration, overlooking it, they are helping it along. They are
assisting it. They are going after whistleblowers, as your colleague
pointed out, and they are benefiting from all this politically with
contributions to their campaign, not to mention the voting issue
that you referenced earlier as well. Is that all accurate?
Mr. HUDSON. I believe so.
Mr. JORDAN. Oh. Now there are more than six agencies involved.
There are six Federal agencies that got shaken down, but there is
two other agencies involved now, the FBI and the DOJ. Right? How
many people have been indicted now?
Mr. HUDSON. I do not have that number in front of me, but it
is significant.
Mr. JORDAN. And I do not know how long y’all been in the legis-
lature. We appreciate your work, appreciate what you do. But have
you ever seen anything like this in your time in the—I have never
seen anything like this in—Ms. Robbins, you are the Chair.
Ms. ROBBINS. No, sir. We have never seen anything on this scale.
It is unbelievable. As Joe Thompson said, it is breathtaking and
cannot be overstated.
Mr. JORDAN. Yes. Well, God bless you all. Ms. Rarick, I will give
you the last word.
Ms. RARICK. Thank you. So, I have been there since 2013, and
I have been yelled at by Democrats over and over again throughout
our time there to say that ‘‘there is no fraud; this is just made up.’’
Mr. JORDAN. Yes. This is the template. You see this all the time.
The left will tell a lie—‘‘We are feeding kids,’’ when they are not—
when they are just shaking down the taxpayer. The left will tell
a lie. The media will report the lie or not report when the truth
comes out. And then, when you tell the truth, they call you a rac-
ist. It is as old as time. We see it all the time. This is so long—
God bless you all for coming forward and getting the facts to the
people in Minnesota and, more importantly, to the people of this
great county. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Lynch from Massachusetts.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to be clear that fraud is unacceptable at any level. How-
ever, I did have an opportunity to spend the day with a bunch of
my kids in my district at my local Head Start center in Quincy, the
Wahlberg Center, and they actually are able to feed those kids
breakfast, lunch, and a snack for $6 a day.
And I just want to say, from this Committee, this investigative
Committee, if we are really looking for fraud, if we are truly look-
ing for fraud, in addition to all the cases that Mr. Ballou listed, we
do not need to go far. I can even suggest the address: 1600 Penn-
sylvania Ave. If we are looking for fraud in this country, that is a
great place to start. That is a gold mine for looking for fraud.
And I will just give one example. You know, you do not have to
go back in time very far to see a great example of the fraud that
22
has been put upon this country. Last month, President Trump put
his name on the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
For those of you who are too young to remember, JFK was a war
hero, from my state. He was an Irish Catholic, first Catholic elect-
ed President. Fought a lot of bigotry during his time trying to be-
come President. He actually stood up to the Russians.
But he was a war hero, a decorated war hero. He is the only
United States President to ever have received the Purple Heart. He
also received the Medal of Valor from the Navy and the Marine
Corps because during World War II he was commanding a PT boat,
PT 109; his vessel was struck by a destroyer in the South Pacific,
and he actually risked his life to save his crew members.
And after he was assassinated, LBJ, Lyndon Baines Johnson, his
successor, and the U.S. Congress at that time recognized his serv-
ice and sacrifice to this country by naming the performing arts cen-
ter after him.
He had raised most of the money to build that center, he and
Jacqueline Kennedy.
And it is shameful, it is—it is a case of stolen valor for this Presi-
dent to put his name above the name of John F. Kennedy. That is
a fraud being perpetrated on this country right now. And if we are
really interested in rooting out fraud, how about starting right
there? I have legislation that will take Trump’s name off that
building and restore it.
You know, Congress acknowledged Kennedy’s service and sac-
rifice to our country. He sacrificed everything—everything—for this
country. And yet we have allowed this to happen and we have al-
lowed that fraud, that valor to be stolen from John F. Kennedy. It
is wrong. It is wrong.
And while I know Trump has his supporters and his minions and
there is no depth to the shame that they will stoop to—but we, as
Americans, should defend—defend—the history, defend the good-
ness that has been done by previous leaders.
It is ironic that Jacqueline Kennedy actually established the
White House Historical Society, and she did so in a manner that
she said, we should honor every President within the White House
regardless of party but because of the service and the sacrifice that
they have made on behalf of our country.
That is a much different sentiment that is held at the White
House today, when you see the shameful plaques that have been
put up by this President denigrating previous Presidents and their
service to this country.
So, I hope my colleagues will join me in that legislation to restore
the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and eliminate
this fraud, glaring fraud, that is being perpetrated on the American
people.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Byron Donalds from
the great State of Florida.
Mr. DONALDS. Thank you, Chairman.
Before I begin, I have a letter to submit for the record, titled
‘‘Collective Request for congressional Oversight. Systematic Retal-
iation in Governance: Failure at the Minnesota Department of
Human Services.’’
23
Chairman, this letter was written by the whistleblowers and has
been provided to the Committee. I want to submit that for the
record.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. DONALDS. Ms. Rarick, first of all, thank you for your service
to the State of Minnesota.
I want to refer back to your commentary about a meeting where
the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Minnesota, Lieutenant
Governor Flanagan, came and admonished these whistleblowers.
Can you go into more detail about what was said in this meet-
ing?
Ms. RARICK. Thank you, Mr. Congressman.
So, I do not have any more detail other than what I read into
the record, unfortunately. It was obviously a public meeting, and
there were hundreds of DHS employees—so Department of Human
Services employees—there. It was a story that has been reported
multiple times on the X page, but I do not have any more details
than that, other than the fact that that was not the only time that
she retaliated.
Mr. DONALDS. Do you think that the Lieutenant Governor was
operating outside of the purview of Governor Walz?
Ms. RARICK. So, it is interesting, the timing, and it was before
he ran as the Vice President. And so, she was completely almost
tied at the hip with Governor Walz at that time in history.
Mr. DONALDS. I think it is important for people to understand
that in virtually every state in the country the Lieutenant Gov-
ernor is essentially chosen by the Governor. And so, Lieutenant
Governors typically do not operate outside of the purview of the
Governor. It is kind of their job to, you know, play QB2, if you will,
to the Governor.
So, would it be—would it be clear to state that the Lieutenant
Governor’s comments trying to railroad whistleblowers, trying to
demean whistleblowers and discourage whistleblowers was at the
directive of Governor Walz?
Ms. RARICK. You can definitely assume that, because, like I said,
at that moment in time, up until the point where the Governor ran
for VP, she was seen at literally every press conference, she was
in all the meetings, they were tied at the hip, they were always to-
gether. So, if she was saying it, he had approved it; I am certain
of it.
Mr. DONALDS. Well, I guess you could say she is kind of a knuck-
lehead too.
Moving on, the list of programs in the fraud in Minnesota are
rampant. You have the Child Care Assistance Program. You have
the Feeding Our Future. You have a housing—the Housing Sta-
bilization Services. You have the Early Intensive Development and
Behavioral Intervention. You have Integrated Community Sup-
ports.
Ms. Robbins, you are the Chair of the investigative committee.
The depth of fraud that you have seen, were there controls in place
in the State of Minnesota that could have prevented this fraud?
And were these controls ignored by the Walz Administration and
by the Department of Human Services?
Ms. ROBBINS. Absolutely.
24
So, we have many whistleblower reports talking about how DHS
undermined ability to strengthen internal controls.
So, for example, there was an effort for the Child Care Assist-
ance Program—they have a ‘‘clear and convincing evidence’’ stand-
ard to disqualify someone from being a provider, where all the
other programs are a lower standard, ‘‘preponderance of the evi-
dence.’’ There was an effort to make this a lower standard, so it
was easier to disqualify people, to ‘‘preponderance.’’ And the Min-
nesota Minority Childcare Association, which was run by a group
of Somali providers, opposed it, and DHS went along with their
recommendation.
And in a similar vein, we were trying to reduce the number of
childcare employees with children that could work in these
childcare centers, because that was one of the vectors of fraud——
Mr. DONALDS. Right.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. And they opposed that.
Mr. DONALDS. So, you have the Somali community who on pur-
pose was petitioning the State of Minnesota to lower the stand-
ards—lower the standards to be able to make sure that fraud could
not be caught. Is that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Well, they wanted to keep the standard ‘‘clear and
convincing,’’ which makes it harder to disqualify people. So——
Mr. DONALDS. So, it makes it harder for them to be disqualified
from wasting taxpayer funds. Is that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Absolutely.
Mr. DONALDS. Okay.
Ms. Robbins, I want to stay with you. I want to talk about use
of funds. You have talked about, some of these funds were used to
buy property in Kenya?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. DONALDS. Property in Turkey? Do I have that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. DONALDS. Remittances back to Somalia?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. DONALDS. I think it is important for the Committee to under-
stand that these remittances, in part, are used in what is called the
‘‘hawala’’—I want to make sure I have the terminology right—the
‘‘hawala network.’’
Ms. Robbins, can you speak to what the hawala network is?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. So, it is an informal network where someone
brings—goes to a hawala place in Minneapolis, which is like a
money exchange or a money sending site, and they say, ‘‘I want to
send X amount of dollars,’’ and then there is a receiving site in So-
malia, and they put the cash—take the cash out. So, money does
not cross the border. It is an order for money here that gets trans-
mitted to Somalia.
Mr. DONALDS. For the time, because I am out of time, I want to
expound.
In Somalia and other parts in the Middle East, in the Middle
East region writ large, a hawala network is a bunch of money ex-
changers, hand to hand, not bank account to bank account.
Ms. ROBBINS. Exactly.
Mr. DONALDS. And what is clear in Somalia and other parts is
that Al Shabaab, the largest al-Qaida affiliate in Somalia, they
25
have their hands all through this network. So, taxpayer money,
United States dollars that are being remitted into Somalia, in part
have been utilized or have fell into the hands of Al Shabaab.
Do you think that is a correct assessment?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. We have plenty of evidence of that, from
money directly going to Al Shabaab, but then also indirectly be-
cause they take a cut of whatever gets sent to Somalia.
Mr. DONALDS. Thank you so much.
Chairman, I know I am over. Thank you for your—for the addi-
tional time. I yield back.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair, I seek recognition for a unanimous
consent request.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Ms. Pressley.
Ms. PRESSLEY. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record
a December 2025 article from the Minnesota Star Tribune, titled
‘‘Contrary to Trump’s Claims, Somalis Add $8 Billion to Min-
nesota’s Economy.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes Ro Khanna from California.
Mr. KHANNA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, fraud, waste, and abuse is not a partisan issue.
FDR, in 1932, with the New Deal, railed against inefficiencies and
fraud and waste in state and local government. I want to be clear,
many in the Democratic Party stand against the misappropriation
or misuse of taxpayer dollars.
The reality is, as a progressive Democrat, I believe the ultra-
wealthy should pay more, but I want that money going for the
healthcare, the childcare, and the education of the American peo-
ple. It offends me if there is waste or fraud in any of our states.
That is why I called for people in my State of California to share
stories of inefficiencies, fraud, or wasteful spending. I partnered
with the ‘‘All-In’’ podcast to advertise that we need to be respon-
sible stewards of our tax dollars.
And I believe we should be doing this for all 50 states. I chal-
lenge my colleagues on the Republican side: Let us have an audit
of all 50 states to make sure that government money is being spent
wisely.
We do not need to make these partisan hearings. Every Amer-
ican has a stake in making sure that they have a receipt for where
their tax dollars are going. Every American has a stake, if we are
going to ask them to pay tax, to make sure that that money is not
being wasted.
And I would like to see this Committee work together to stand
up for basic fairness of the American taxpayers. I certainly am
going to do that in the State of California, and we should be doing
that in all 50 states.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Thank you, Representative Khanna. And I be-
lieve you are sincere, and we want to work with you on fraud in
any state. If it is a Republican state, Democratic state, we do not
care. The mission of this Committee is to root out waste, fraud,
abuse, and mismanagement, and we would gladly work with you.
Mr. KHANNA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Yes, sir.
26
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. I have a UC request.
Chairman COMER. Proceed.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you.
The first one is, ‘‘Arizona Has Recovered Just five percent of Tax-
payer Dollars Lost in a $2.5 Billion Medicaid Fraud Scheme.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BIGGS. And I will save the rest for the future. No, I have got
a bunch of more, but not right now, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER. Okay. All right.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
I will—the Chair recognizes myself for 5 minutes of questioning.
Yesterday, Minnesota’s Office of the Legislative Auditor pub-
lished an audit of the state’s Department of Human Services’ Be-
havioral Health Administration grants. I would like to enter that
report and its cover letter into the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
The cover letter of this report states, quote, ‘‘However, during the
course of our audit, we identified a number of documents that the
Behavioral Health Administration either backdated or created after
our audit happened,’’ end quote.
It sounds like Governor Tim Walz’s Department of Human Serv-
ices may have been fabricating evidence by creating documentation
after the fact to mislead voters—to mislead auditors.
This new report noted that one grantee who received nearly
$680,000 from this agency for one month’s work but could not pro-
vide any documentation or proof that any work was actually com-
pleted.
What is more—and this is the kicker—the report notes that the
grant manager who approved this money left the agency within
days of approving the grant to take a job with the very same grant-
ee that they approved money for.
So, very quickly, Representative Robbins, have you ever seen
anything like this in your time as a member of the Minnesota
Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee?
Ms. ROBBINS. We have heard whistleblower reports of backdating
and falsification before. And we also have a record of earlier in the
CCAP, the childcare fraud, where they would allow the providers
to submit records far after the investigation and accept them as
true.
So, clearly, this has been a pattern at the agency, and it is unac-
ceptable.
Chairman COMER. Unbelievable.
And we want to work with you; we want to work with these
whistleblowers. We are serious about this. The Trump Administra-
tion is on the ground. We want to catch these people, and we want
to put them behind bars. And we want to hold any politician that
participated in these schemes accountable.
Representative Hudson, who is to blame for this dysfunction?
Mr. HUDSON. Well, the blame can go around quite a bit, but, as
Tim Walz himself said, the buck stops with him.
27
Chairman COMER. Representative Robbins, do you have any ex-
amples of how the Walz Administration blocked investigators from
moving forward with high-priority fraud investigations?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, we do, Mr. Chairman. I have met with whis-
tleblowers and gotten documents from them about how, after the
original CCAP whistleblower report came out in March and April
of 2019, subsequent to that, there was an Office of Inspector Gen-
eral within DHS that had investigative authority to do surveil-
lance, warrants, and seize electronics, and they were shut down.
They were told they could no longer do criminal investigations.
They were told they could no longer meet with the Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension agents that were assigned to them without
supervisor’s approval.
And, instead, when they found—one of the other members talked
about how they changed the language. They went from calling it
‘‘fraud’’ to calling it ‘‘overbilling.’’ And they created an overbilling
committee to—all the investigative agents now could not do crimi-
nal investigations, and they had to flag issues of overbilling, and
then a committee would decide if any of that overbilling would be
recouped.
Chairman COMER. A committee by—appointed by Walz?
Ms. ROBBINS. No, appointed within DHS.
Chairman COMER. Oh, appointed by their own bureaucracy?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. So, they shut down criminal investigations.
They created a committee to call it overbilling and decide if over-
billing investigations would even try to recoup the money.
Chairman COMER. So, this is evidence that Tim Walz interfered
with investigators who knew there was fraud. The rumors of fraud
have been taking place—I have been hearing them for a decade.
And yet, he interfered to try to obstruct their investigation of
fraud.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. His agency shut down criminal investigations.
Chairman COMER. Representative Hudson, we did not get $9 bil-
lion stolen overnight. How did the fraud in Minnesota become so
widespread?
Mr. HUDSON. Well, listen, let me give the maximum benefit of
the doubt that these programs were designed for a beneficial legis-
lative intent.
Chairman COMER. Of course.
Mr. HUDSON. The way that it happened was, when people recog-
nized that the system was not working and they raised those con-
cerns, those concerns were ignored. And a culture suppressing rais-
ing those concerns was fostered by the Walz Administration.
Chairman COMER. So, obviously, there was a lack of oversight by
the Walz Administration.
Why would Governor Walz let $9 billion in fraud occur, Mr. Hud-
son?
Mr. HUDSON. In my opinion, because it was politically beneficial
to Democrats. Again, the Somali community is a huge constituency
group, and we have had some tight races in Minnesota, and it
makes a difference for them.
Chairman COMER. Because it is a huge part of the Democrat vot-
ing base in Minnesota. Is that correct?
Mr. HUDSON. Correct.
28
Chairman COMER. Representative Rarick, Governor Walz’s an-
nouncement not to seek a third term seems to be an admission of
guilt, I think, to most Americans and an attempt by the Democrat
establishment to cover up his role in the rampant fraud. He claims
this is so he can focus on ‘‘defending the people of Minnesota
against criminals who prey on our generosity.’’
As someone who has been in the Minnesota legislature longer
than Tim Walz has been Governor, can Governor Walz actually be
trusted to defend Minnesotans, when he allowed fraud to fester for
his entire tenure as Governor?
Ms. RARICK. Mr. Chairman, if Governor Walz was serious about
stopping fraud, he would have done it in 2019 when he took office.
He has done nothing other than appoint commissioners that sup-
pressed fraud and retaliated against their own employees.
Chairman COMER. And just think, this man was almost elected
Vice President of the United States. This was the pick for the sit-
ting Vice President of the United States to be the next Vice Presi-
dent of the United States. This is unbelievable.
If people are not held accountable, if people do not go to jail for
this, this will continue, not just in Minnesota but other states.
And we are going to do everything we can on this Committee to
work with you all and every whistleblower in Minnesota and any
other of the 49 states who wants to come forward to expose waste,
fraud, and abuse. We are going to work with you and eliminate it
and hold people accountable.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Mfume? Is that right?
Ms. ANSARI. Mr. Chairman, I just have a UC request.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Go ahead.
Ms. ANSARI. The first one is from the American Immigration
Council: ‘‘Immigrants Contribute Billions to Federal and State
Taxes Each Year’’; as well as, ‘‘Immigrants Do Not Commit More
Crimes in the United States, Despite Fearmongering.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Mfume from Maryland.
Mr. MFUME. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I want to thank
you and the Ranking Member for bringing us together on this
today.
I have a request for unanimous consent to enter into the record
a letter from James Clark, the Inspector General of the Minnesota
Department of Human Services, directed to the Fraud Prevention
and State Agency Oversight Committee of the House of Represent-
atives in Minnesota, requesting information on the alleged 700 tips
that have been received.
I would like to enter that with unanimous consent, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. MFUME. Mr. Chair, I know we are up against the clock.
Many of us are trying to get to the special briefings on the action
that has taken place in Venezuela, and so we are leaving one by
one. I do want to try to get a couple things in before I have to de-
part also.
I want to thank you again. As Ranking Member of this Commit-
tee’s Subcommittee on Government Operations, it has been my
focus to combat waste, fraud, and abuse within the Federal Gov-
ernment for the last 3–1/2 years.
29
Regardless of what side you are on, what side of the aisle or
what you believe, as has been stated, everybody should be against
fraud. It requires our collective attention to address the issue and
to minimize the consequences that we are seeing that are taking
place—not minimize the consequences to the perpetrators, but min-
imize the hurt to taxpayers in this country.
As the Ranking Member of that Committee [sic], we have com-
mitted ourselves to fight this full and necessary issue over and over
again. And I believe that, from most of the people I have heard,
we are all in concurrence that stealing from taxpayers is the wrong
thing, period.
Now, the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Mr. Sessions, and
I—who is the Chairman of that Subcommittee—have been working
together on a bipartisan basis to create a congressional scorecard
to assess the progress of key government spending programs in re-
ducing fraud and improper payments, both through the Federal
Government and through states.
Additionally, through the American Rescue Plan Act, Congress
has provided funding for the Pandemic Response Accountability
Committee (PRAC) as well as the Pandemic Analytic Center of Ex-
cellence to deter, detect, and prevent fraud across multiple state
agencies and multiple Federal agencies. I have also co-led several
bills here in the House that address that type of fraud.
Congress should defend these programs that seek to find a way
to root out this problem, and we need to do that in a bipartisan,
nonpartisan way.
The Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency, in
their report a year and a half ago to the Congress and to the Presi-
dent, found that every dollar spent on the Office of Inspectors Gen-
eral—as a result, $26 was saved for every $1 that was spent.
Now, that is a return on investment that taxpayers deserve. And,
unfortunately, the Trump Administration illegally defunded CIGIE
last year. And I have joined with my colleagues, several of whom
on this Committee, in leading several letters to oppose that unlaw-
ful set of firings of Inspector Generals.
I urge this Administration, again, and my colleagues to restore
the congressionally designated funding to CIGIE and the Offices of
Inspectors General so that we might be able to continue the work
necessary to combat waste, fraud, and abuse.
Before I yield, I want to thank Mr. Ro Khanna for his comments
that this issue should be nonpartisan, that when we make it some-
thing other than that, we take away from our ability to bring about
change and we in some sort of way chip away at the, sort of, belief
that the public has that we are really serious about doing some-
thing here.
So, it was concerning to me, also, to have heard some of the xen-
ophobia that began earlier in this hearing, Mr. Chairman—dif-
ferences, differences versus similarities. And when we do that, we
create the problems that we always are trying to do away with.
Asking witnesses to give their opinion of Somalis as a general
group of Americans; asking witnesses their opinion, ‘‘Do you think
they vote for Democrats? Do you think they just give money to
Democrats?’’; asking their opinion, ‘‘What is your opinion of Soma-
lians? What is your’’—we might as well say, ‘‘What is your opinion
30
of Jews? What is your opinion of Black people? What is your opin-
ion of Latinos?’’ That sort of thing, although it may sound good and
play to the issue, creates a slippery slope—I want to caution peo-
ple—a slippery slope.
We heard earlier that, of over 100,000 Somalis in this country,
87 were indicted in Minnesota. That comes out to .087 percent.
Those sorts of things create, I think, the disbelief that a lot of
people have that we are about doing the business that we ought
to do. And it gets back to the point that the gentleman from Cali-
fornia raised, that we have got to find a way to keep this from
being partisan and to keep it from being subjective.
I would yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs before I go to Mr. Crane.
Mr. Biggs, you have a UC?
Mr. BIGGS. Yes. Yes, sir.
The first one is ‘‘Tim Walz Claims He Fired People Amid Fraud
Scandals—But Won’t Name Names.’’
Next one: ‘‘Walz Appointees Failed to Stop Rampant Minnesota
Fraud.’’
Next one: ‘‘Exclusive: DHS Insider Claims Systemic Issues in Ad-
dressing Fraud.’’
Next one: ‘‘Here is What the Trump Administration Is Doing to
Crush Minnesota’s Fraud Epidemic.’’
Next one: ‘‘Minnesota Fraud Committee Chair Claims Walz
‘Turned a Blind Eye’ to Fraud Warnings for Years.’’
And I will yield back.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane, for
5 minutes.
Mr. CRANE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Grateful to have elected officials from Minnesota here today who
can provide more intimate information regarding this mind-blowing
fraud coming from the Somali community in Minnesota. According
to Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson, there is an estimated $9
billion or more in fraud. Many, obviously, believe that this is just
the tip of the iceberg.
I want to thank and acknowledge the independent reporters,
Nick Shirley and Dave Hoch, who broke this story wide open.
Today I am introducing a bill to award Nick Shirley with the con-
gressional Medal for his explosive work in exposing astronomical
fraud in Minnesota. And the reason I am doing this is because the
American people are sick and tired of this, and they are sick and
tired of mainstream media not covering any of it.
The biggest question that most Americans, however, have is this:
Is this incompetence at the executive level with the Governor and
Attorney General? Are they involved and complicit?
I am going to start with you, Ms. Robbins.
Ms. ROBBINS. Thank you, sir.
My understanding is that they were certainly aware of the fraud
and they did nothing to stop it. And there were plenty of opportuni-
ties. And their commissioners and their agencies also undermined
efforts to tighten internal controls.
31
Mr. CRANE. And, according to Ms. Rarick—I believe you said that
they were actually going after whistleblowers to suppress the ex-
pose of this fraud. Is that correct?
Ms. RARICK. That is what the whistleblowers have said repeat-
edly.
Mr. CRANE. Thank you.
One thing that is so alarming is the reporting that many of these
fraudulent companies are then donating the stolen money back to
the same Democrats that are protecting them and advocate for
these very programs.
Is that correct, Mr. Hudson?
Mr. HUDSON. I would agree with that statement.
Mr. CRANE. Well, we just had one of my Democrat colleagues say
these are just opinions. Do you know, are these guys donating
money back to Democrats?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, they are.
Mr. CRANE. I would like to enter into the record, Mr. Chairman,
an article from Breitbart News saying—with the title being ‘‘Data
base Searches Show Somali Fraudsters Funding Democrat Politi-
cians.’’
So, these are not opinions; there is——
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. CRANE [continuing]. Actually reporting on this.
Are you guys aware—you guys are elected officials in Minnesota,
right? Are you guys aware of the reporting that some of the stolen
money is getting funneled back to the Islamic terror group Al
Shabaab in Somalia?
Ms. Robbins?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir. And we have evidence of it going back as
far as 2012, where a man was convicted of sending $21,000 to Al
Shabaab. In 2011, two Minnesota women were convicted of sending
money to different groups. Someone else—we have multiple ref-
erences of how the Al Shabaab takes a cut when the money gets
to Somalia through the hawala network.
So, I think there is ample evidence on this—and Federal convic-
tions.
Mr. CRANE. Yes. That is outrageous.
Obviously, one of the biggest reasons so many Americans are out-
raged by this massive exposure is because we generously and often
foolishly allow immigrants and people into our country and then
they rob the American people blind, while our debt skyrockets and
the American people struggle to make ends meet.
What do you guys—are you guys hearing from your constituents
the same outrage that I am hearing from mine about this issue?
Ms. ROBBINS. Minnesotans are fed up. Everywhere I go in the
state, Minnesotans are so frustrated. As I said in my opening re-
marks, we are a highly taxed state, and they are angry that this
much of their money, $9 billion, is being absconded by criminals.
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Hudson, are you just hearing from Republicans
on this, or are Democrat constituents like, ‘‘Oh my god, I am strug-
gling to put my kids in school, struggling to make ends meet, and
my tax dollars are being robbed by people, and then they are send-
ing it all over the place, and this is complete fraud. What is going
on, and why hasn’t anything been done about it?’’
32
Mr. HUDSON. I will give you a personal example. So, my family,
my in-laws in particular, are politically diverse. A lot of them vote
for Democrats. And they are fairly apolitical; they are not like me,
all plugged in. And so, I kind of use them as a bellwether for what
the people are thinking. Across the board, everybody is upset about
this fraud.
Mr. CRANE. And I am guessing, when you guys bring this up,
whether it is to the Walz Administration, whether it is to the AG,
the number-one thing that comes back at you is, you are a racist,
you are a White supremacist, or you are an Islamophobe.
As we have seen Governor Walz now trying to answer for these
questions, he is doing it at the national level. Are you guys—do you
guys hear the same thing at the state level as well?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, absolutely. They always pivot to the divisive.
As I stated in my opening statement, it is diversion, right? We are
going to talk about personalities, we are going to talk about par-
tisan politics, we are going to find some way to get people yelling
at each other rather than looking at the problem.
Mr. CRANE. Or, like you have heard my colleagues do on this
panel, it is Donald Trump, baby.
Mr. HUDSON. Yep.
Mr. CRANE. It is all about Donald Trump, right? The old pivot.
We are not going to talk about what is going on in Somalia and
what is—or, not going to talk about what is going on in Minnesota
with this massive fraud scandal. We are going to talk about Donald
Trump.
With my remaining seconds, can we play the video I have, Mr.
Chairman?
Chairman COMER. Um.
Mr. CRANE. Or did we run out of time?
Chairman COMER. We did run out of time. But can we put that
in the record? Would that—can we?
Mr. CRANE. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Yes.
Mr. CRANE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Thank you.
Representative Crane yields back.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Stansbury from New Mexico.
Ms. STANSBURY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Happy New Year. Welcome to our guests. Thank you to our
legislators for being here today, and to our guests.
You know, I am always—I come these to these Committee hear-
ings; I am ready to debate the topics. I am grateful that you are
bringing this case to our attention. Yes, we need to prosecute these
crimes, period. Period. Let us do that.
And I am also grateful to see that this Committee is actually con-
ducting a hearing that is in its jurisdiction, which is oversight over
government fraud.
But I do have to say, to my colleague’s point that was just made,
that I am surprised to see the focus, given that the President of
the United States and the Administration are engaged in fraudu-
lent behavior literally daily. Including, just a few days ago, invad-
ing a foreign country, using the United States military to take
their oil, and notifying oil and gas companies before the U.S. Con-
33
gress, and the President claiming last night that he is personally
going to control the oil and give government kickbacks to oil and
gas companies.
So, why are we not investigating that? It definitely gives you the
impression that there is a double standard in this country.
I also want to say that I am troubled to see that this hearing is
being held in conjunction with an announcement that the Adminis-
tration made just yesterday that they were going to freeze $10 bil-
lion in Federal funding for childcare and family assistance to five
states across the country. And if you watched the President’s crazy
address yesterday, you heard him say it himself.
But I want to say one thing, because my colleagues have pointed
out all about weaponizing the government for political purposes.
Well, these five states happen to have one thing in common: They
all have Democratic Governors and gubernatorial elections this
year. Is this a coincidence? I do not think so, my friends.
And this, of course, comes after weeks of viral videos from a
young-man YouTuber who was literally creeping around daycares
by himself, making claims about fraud that were not there. And
then the Vice President and the FBI Director were retweeting
these videos without even verifying if they were true, unleashing
a furor of anti-immigrant and anti-Somali hate across the country,
wherein thousands of Somali people got targeted and harassed, in-
cluding by the President of the United States, who literally used
his platform as the President of the United States to call an entire
community ‘‘garbage.’’ He literally said that.
So, we are not ‘‘accusing’’ people of being xenophobic and racist.
They are being xenophobic and racist, including the President of
the United States. And I want to say, for one, that I stand with
the Somali and the immigrant community, standing here today.
But there is a bigger policy point here, which is that this is being
used as a politically expedient moment to take away the immigra-
tion status of Somalis in the United States as part of the mass de-
portation plan of this Administration. And it is also being used by
the 2025’ers in this Administration to freeze critical programs that
we know low-income families depend on and which they call part
of the ‘‘woke agenda.’’ This is part of a larger effort to defund these
programs, as we are seeing across these five states.
So, I think it is important to pull back the curtain a little bit
about what is actually going on in this hearing and its coordination
with the Administration. That this is about, one, demonizing polit-
ical opponents in Democratic states during a major election cycle;
two, it is about demonizing the immigrant community to support
cruel and illegal mass deportation policies; and, three, it is about
demonizing poor people and struggling families to justify taking
away the basic programs that are helping them survive in this
country.
So, I want to just close out by saying that I grew up in a low-
income family. Many of you have heard my story before. But as I
woke up to the news that the President was freezing childcare
funding to these five states, I had to think about the millions of
families that would be impacted by it. I think about my own mom,
a single mom, barely struggling to get by, working multiple jobs.
34
These programs are a lifeline. They make it possible for people like
me to ultimately have a pathway to success.
And you all are sitting here running legislation on showerheads
while millions of Americans’ health insurance is expiring, while
millions of Americans cannot even put food on the table right now.
And you are over here parading around state officials, demonizing
immigrants, talking about cutting basic programs, and you are
passing legislation to redefine showerheads in Congress, while the
President of the United States is illegally invading foreign coun-
tries.
Mr. BIGGS. Order.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady’s time has expired.
Ms. STANSBURY. So, I find it appalling and disgusting——
Mr. BIGGS. Order. Order.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady’s time has expired.
The Chair recognizes Dr. Foxx from North Carolina.
Mr. BIGGS. I have a UC request.
Chairman COMER. Oh, before the Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs
from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a UC request.
First one: ‘‘HHS Freezes Childcare Payments to Minnesota After
Massive Fraud Alleged.’’
Next one: ‘‘Minnesota’s Quality ‘Learing’ Center Fixes Sign. Ad-
dress Still Misspelled.’’
‘‘Minnesota Made ‘It Easier’ to Get Into Daycare Business.’’
‘‘Trump’s Deputies Freeze Childcare Payments to Minnesota
Amid Alleged Somali Fraud!’’
‘‘Jonathan Turley Explains Why Feds Can Dig Deep Into Somali
Scammer Scandal.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Gill.
Mr. GILL. I have got another UC request, an article from City
Journal, quote, ‘‘The Largest Funder of Al-Shabaab is the Min-
nesota Taxpayer.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
I believe, Mr. Fallon, you have a request?
Mr. FALLON. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would like to enter into the
record an article by the Center of the American Experiment, ‘‘Feed-
ing Our Future: Keith Ellison Caught on Tape!’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair now recognizes Dr. Foxx from North Carolina.
Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I thank our witnesses for being here today.
Representative Robbins, when Governor Walz testified before
this Committee last June, I reminded him that the fraud involving
the nonprofit Feeding Our Future established Minnesota as ground
zero for the largest COVID–19 fraud scheme in the Nation.
Feeding Our Future took $250 million in Federal funds out of the
mouths of hungry children, which amounts to $1,600 per child liv-
ing in poverty in Minnesota. According to the FBI, the $250 million
in Federal taxpayer money was funneled, quote, ‘‘into luxury
homes, cars, and lavish lifestyles while families struggled,’’ end
quote.
35
The FBI stated it, quote, ‘‘will not allow criminals to rob Federal
programs and walk away unscathed. We will expose their schemes,
dismantle their networks, and ensure they face the full weight of
justice,’’ end quote.
Last June, Governor Walz assured me that he, quote, ‘‘whole-
heartedly,’’ end quote, supported the Federal Government’s efforts
to bring to justice those who stole Federal taxpayer money at the
expense of hungry children.
If he had been true to his word, we would not be sitting here
today. However, the Committee’s back today because the Feeding
Our Future scam is just the tip of the iceberg of fraud in Min-
nesota and perhaps beyond.
Representative Robbins, Democrats in your state have tried to
dismiss your inquiry into the Feeding Our Future fraud as a par-
tisan political exercise. Is exposing fraud and theft of taxpayer
funds a partisan activity?
Ms. ROBBINS. No, ma’am. As I said in our first Committee hear-
ing, it is nonpartisan. Everyone should want to protect taxpayers
and vulnerable citizens.
Ms. FOXX. And we completely agree.
Representative Robbins, did Governor Walz work with you and
your Committee ‘‘wholeheartedly’’ to bring justice to those involved
in the Feeding Our Future fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. No, ma’am. They have ignored the documents we
have provided to them.
We did a hearing in February 2025 on childcare fraud that was
outlined in the Nick Shirley video, and we gave them a list of 72
childcare providers that we were concerned about that got a million
dollars each or more. And, as we saw in the Shirley video last
month, they have done nothing about it.
Ms. FOXX. Representative Hudson, for several years we have
heard about whistleblowers, highlighted by some of us in Congress,
who noted instances of fraud in Minnesota. With this in mind, the
recent allegations from Nick Shirley regarding staggering amounts
of fraud involving childcare centers come as no surprise.
What kind of climate did Governor Walz create for whistle-
blowers?
Mr. HUDSON. Well, I think he did a really good job of dem-
onstrating for us the kind of climate that he has created yesterday,
when, in an unhinged rant, he tried to throw Deputy U.S. Attorney
Joe Thompson under the bus, a guy who has been doing this for,
I believe, 16 years.
If he is willing to throw a deputy U.S. Attorney under the bus,
what do you think he is going to do to a state agency employee?
That is the climate. And everybody who works for the Walz Ad-
ministration knows it.
Ms. FOXX. Thank you.
Representative Rarick, do you believe the Walz Administration
seriously pursued whistleblowers’ reports of fraud?
Ms. RARICK. I think that the Walz Administration seriously re-
taliated against whistleblowers and ignored them and dismissed
them. And, you know, in my opening statement, I talked about the
threats of firing them and blacklisting them and things like that.
So that is what the Walz Administration focused on.
36
Ms. FOXX. Representative Rarick, innocent American taxpayers
are collateral damage in the Democrats’ reckless disregard for tax-
payer funds. Hardworking Americans and their communities are
left to pay the price.
What lessons can other states and Federal officials take from
your work to expose the stunning amount of fraud and the network
of those who enabled it, that you all have exposed in Minnesota?
Ms. RARICK. The answer to that is very simple, and that is: If
you just do simple, basic good governance like reconciliation and a
few other financial controls, you will not have the problems that
you have here. And if you do not retaliate against your employees,
your frontline workers that point out fraud, you will not have this
problem either.
Ms. FOXX. Representative Hudson, do you have anything you
would like to add to that?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, absolutely. You have to have a culture of good
faith. And that is what is lacking in Minnesota. There is not a cul-
ture of good faith.
And you see a very strange strategy going on right now with
Minnesota Democrats where every day they are denying this prob-
lem, which really strikes me as bizarre because we know there are
more prosecutions coming. So, what are they going to say as story
after story drops and we can cite time and date where they said
it was not a problem?
Ms. FOXX. Thank you.
And, Mr. Chairman, I would like to note that it was the Edu-
cation and Workforce Committee when I was Chair that first
brought this issue to the public’s attention, and we got nowhere
under a Democrat administration.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. That is exactly correct. Thank you, Dr. Foxx.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Summer Lee from Pennsylvania.
Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think like so many people on this Committee have already ar-
ticulated, nobody here believes that rooting out fraud and waste
and abuse is not a top priority of this Committee, of our caucus,
of their conference. It is. If you are on this Committee, it is the top
charge that we all undertake incredibly seriously.
But I think, like so many things with the modern Republican
Party, it is like you are skulking right around the edge of things
but too often your bigotry, the Republican Party’s own bigotry, is
imprisoning them and keeping them from ever actually doing some-
thing that helps, not harms, the American people. And this is an-
other one of those instances, right? When it is a person of color, if
it is two or three, it is a pattern, and the entire community must
be indicted. But if it is 100 Republicans, it is just not that. Neither
here nor there.
Because it is important, that is why we have routinely held hear-
ings where we actually go over with the Government Accountability
Office their ‘‘High Risk List.’’ We take it seriously.
But the tone of this hearing seems to be a hypocritical witch
hunt—it is hard to take it as anything but that—rather than an
actual oversight effort.
37
Our Federal Government currently has the tools to catch and
prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. It is how the alleged fraud in
Minnesota was caught by the Biden Administration in the first
place.
Mr. Ballou, as a former Federal prosecutor, you are familiar with
some of the tools that we have, correct?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes.
Ms. LEE. Just briefly, could you please verify the following tools
for me?
Yes or no, does the Government Accountability Office work to re-
duce waste, fraud, and abuse?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes.
Ms. LEE. Do Inspectors General work toward these goals?
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely.
Ms. LEE. What about the Council of the Inspectors General on
Integrity and Efficiency?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes.
Ms. LEE. Are whistleblowers important to rooting out waste,
fraud, and abuse?
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely.
Ms. LEE. Has the Trump Administration helped or hurt these
tools?
Mr. BALLOU. Certainly hurt it by disbanding the council for in-
spectors general and then ultimately firing 19 IGs.
Ms. LEE. Thank you. That is right.
Again and again, Trump has attacked the oversight mechanisms
within the Federal Government. He illegally fired 17 Inspectors
General and other key personnel. He goes after whistleblowers, and
he tries to roll back their protections. He routinely ignores the
rampant corruption within his own Administration.
Republicans have turned a blind eye to all of this. They have
held no hearings on these actions.
And this hearing today is not even about fraud generally within
the Federal benefits system, which we would welcome. Republicans
have cherry-picked a blue state and an immigrant population—vul-
nerable—to demonize. To be clear, Minnesota is not the only state
with a fraud problem.
To truly tackle waste, fraud, and abuse, we need to approach the
issue with a scalpel, not a mallet. Discovering that people are com-
mitting fraud in a Federal program does not mean we should
smash the whole thing and end it. It means its oversight mecha-
nisms need to be improved.
That is why it is so disappointing to see that the Minnesota
House Fraud Prevention Committee that our witness, Hon. Kristin
Robbins, chairs, has issued no reports on these uncovered schemes.
It has not advanced any legislation to address the issue or even
shared whistleblower reports with their Democratic colleagues.
They have just held a bunch of hearings and generated headlines—
something our Committee is all too familiar with.
This hearing is not an effort by Republicans to improve social
service programs. It is an excuse to end them and to punish Demo-
cratic-led states.
This has always been the plan. It is why Republicans’ so-called
Big, Beautiful Bill is estimated to cut more than $1 trillion from
38
Medicaid and CHIP benefits and cut SNAP for 40 million people,
the very children or folks with disabilities who were mentioned in
the opening statements.
Trump has also already taken advantage of the situation in Min-
nesota. After a YouTuber harassed and posted unsubstantiated
claims of fraud against childcare centers, HHS froze childcare fund-
ing to Minnesota, which would affect more than 23,000 children.
Just yesterday, Trump also froze approximately $10 billion in
funding for programs supporting childcare, social services grants,
and cash assistance in not only Minnesota but in other Democratic-
led states—California, Colorado, New York, and Illinois.
No matter what party we are elected to, we represent the people
of our district, Democrat or Republican. We represent, as the Fed-
eral Government, all people of all states irrespective of how they
voted. That is the charge that I took, and I would like and hope
that you all would do the same.
When so many of these social service programs are being gutted
and defunded, fraud becomes even more harmful, as that means
even less money is going to people who need it. People need these
programs.
This situation should be an opportunity to take a deep look at
the programs and improve their oversight abilities, not an excuse
to cut them entirely.
If we care about the most vulnerable, if we care about the most
marginalized, this is an opportunity to do so. And I welcome us to
actually do that one day.
Thanks. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Ms. Lee, the IGs are hired to identify fraud.
They have not identified fraud. The IGs have failed.
But, anyway.
Ms. LEE. You all have failed.
Chairman COMER. No. You——
Ms. LEE. You all continue to fail.
Chairman COMER [continuing]. All have failed. You——
Ms. LEE. We have done nothing. You have the gavel, Mr. Comer.
Chairman COMER. This is——
Ms. LEE. We barely do hearings——
Chairman COMER. How do you say we failed?
Ms. LEE [continuing]. On anything that actually affects change.
Chairman COMER. You have failed. You want——
Ms. LEE. You have power here, and yet you——
Chairman COMER [continuing]. To spend more money, more
money, more money.
Ms. LEE [continuing]. Do not do anything.
Mr. FALLON. Decorum.
Ms. LEE. Yes. He actually initiated this, though——
Chairman COMER. All right. The Chair recognizes——
Ms. LEE [continuing]. But thank you so much for your opinion.
Chairman COMER. You have failed.
Ms. LEE. I yielded back.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry from Pennsyl-
vania for 5 minutes.
Mr. PERRY. I thank the Chairman.
39
And I would just like to point out to everybody that, at this very
moment, we are going to consider an appropriations bill that had
an earmark in it for a million dollars for another Somali-led organi-
zation whose family has ties and convictions to ISIS and fentanyl-
related addiction.
And I think it is very difficult to just—for all of us to determine
what is legitimate and what is not.
But I would just ask if the Committee will play the video that
Mr. Crane had referred to for me at this time.
Chairman COMER. Can you stop the—okay. Go ahead.
[Video shown.]
Mr. PERRY. Can we get the sound turned up?
You can see the subtitles there.
If you will notice the campaign contribution at the bottom for
$4,700 and then the $250-million fraud scheme associated with
said individuals.
Listen, ladies and gentlemen, it is not me calling out one commu-
nity or another or one individual Representative or another; it is
fraud.
Representatives Robbins, Hudson, and Rarick, thanks for your
service. I know it is difficult and you are operating in difficult cir-
cumstances where it does not sound like you have got a lot of sup-
port.
And I imagine that, as Ms. Robbins—Representative Robbins,
you are the Chair of the Oversight Policy Committee? Is that right?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. PERRY. Yes. I imagine, at the state level, you do not quite
have the resources you need to track down all this stuff. This Fed-
eral jury found that the Feeding Our Future mastermind and co-
defendant and also the contributor to one of your Representatives
from your state, one of our colleagues here, $4,700, for a $250-mil-
lion pandemic fraud scheme—like, you do not probably have the re-
sources to find that kind of stuff. It is massive, right?
And I suspect, as someone who—you know, you serve at the
pleasure of your constituents who want to see you elected and con-
tribute to you—a $4,700 campaign contribution for $250 million of,
I guess, spending at the Federal level is a pretty good investment
for people.
We are not here to pick on anybody, but I will tell you, I think
the American people are particularly affronted when their goodwill
is returned by stealing their hard-earned money.
I just want to—if you can comment on that particular case, this
Feeding Our Future, and the fact that these folks pled guilty to
$250 million, and then connections to the political operation in
your state which is dismantling your state.
Ms. ROBBINS. Thank you, sir.
Yes. So, this is the big problem. There is a network of people who
have been politically supporting the Democrats, who have also been
contributing to them, and who have been involved in multiple
schemes.
So, a woman who was in this childcare group, the Minnesota Mi-
nority Childcare Association, Ikram Mohamed, she was later in-
dicted in the Feeding Our Future scandal, as was her brother and
40
her mother and, I believe, a sister. And so, it is a network that
functions in our state that we have to get a handle on.
And then one of the people indicted in that case, for Feeding Our
Future, for money-laundering $1.1 million, then they used that
same company, shell company, they did the money laundering
with, to buy property for an assisted-living facility after they were
indicted. And then his wife has a company getting millions of dol-
lars from the state to provide services to the assisted-living facility
bought by his shell company he has already been indicted for.
They do not shut off the spigot. That is the problem.
Mr. PERRY. So, this is completely outrageous, obviously.
I am not an attorney. Are any one of you three attorneys? Are
you?
Ms. ROBBINS. No, sir.
Mr. PERRY. So, you know, you said, Representative Robbins, that
you informed the Governor of these things. That is what you said,
right? That is your testimony here today.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir. I did a hearing on it, and I brought charts
and laid out the roadmap.
Mr. PERRY. So, there are crimes of commission and crimes of
omission. So, if the Governor did not actively be involved in this
fraud, that would be a crime of commission. But if he knew about
it and did not do anything about it, would you consider that a
crime of omission?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. PERRY. And what should be done about crimes of omission
regarding taxpayer funds?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, they should be prosecuted.
And when, as you said, we do not have a lot of resources on our
Committee. As legislators, we do not have access to bank records,
health records, the state payment system. So, when we get credible
allegations of fraud, we bring it to the U.S. Attorney and the Office
of Legislative Auditor, because they can get access to those records
and then bring the prosecutions criminally.
Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Chair. I yield.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. Before I go to Ms. Randall, the Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Biggs for a UC.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number one, ‘‘Washington Post Calls for Welfare Reform After
Minnesota Fraud Scandal.’’
‘‘Exclusive: Treasury and House Panel Launch Probes Into Tim
Walz’s Handling of a Billion Dollars of Food Aid Fraud.’’
Additionally, X—referring to the earmark that Mr. Perry just re-
ferred to.
Additionally, ‘‘The Somali Fraud Scandal Gave Trump a Kill
Switch. What Happens If He Does Not Use It.’’
‘‘Resurfaced Video Shows How Somali Scammers Use Day Care
Centers to Scam State.’’
‘‘Scrutinizing SNAP Will Help Ensure the Neediest Get Food
Stamps.’’
‘‘MASTER Class! AG Hamilton SCHOOLS WaPo Hack Playing
Race Card to Defend Somali Fraud Ring in Minnesota.’’
41
‘‘Tim Walz Was Brought Down by a Scandal Hiding in Plain
Sight.’’
‘‘Unearthed Surveillance Video Shows Parents Allegedly Helping
with Fraud.’’
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back—or, I am sorry.
Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman yields back.
Ms. Randall, a couple of our witnesses have requested bathroom
breaks. I told them the Ranking Member and I agreed, they can
go and come back. We are going to keep the hearing going. If your
questions were pertaining to one of them, we will skip to someone
else, if that——
Ms. RANDALL. That is fine.
Chairman COMER. Do you want to go ahead? All right. The Chair
recognizes you for 5 minutes.
Ms. RANDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
You know, I have prepared some remarks that I definitely want
to get to about the importance of childcare funding for all of us and
all of our districts. I think we all recognize that we are in a
childcare crisis. We have lost so many parents, especially women,
from the workforce because they just cannot find adequate
childcare.
But I have to start by addressing some of what we have heard
in this Committee so far today.
I did not get myself together to ask any of my colleagues to yield
for a question, so I will ask you. And if you do not know the an-
swer, it is okay; I do.
What percent of sexual assaults in the United States are com-
mitted by White men?
Ms. ROBBINS. I do not know.
Ms. RANDALL. Fifty-seven percent.
Of the January 6 insurrectionists who were pardoned, do you
know how many have been charged and convicted and arrested of
additional crimes, including child sexual assault, kidnapping, pro-
duction of child pornography, rape, conspiracy to murder an FBI
agent, domestic violence by strangulation?
Mr. HUDSON. I do not have that information.
Ms. RANDALL. No. Thirty-three since their pardons.
Of the 21,504 murder offenders in the United States in 2023, do
you know how many were White?
Ms. ROBBINS. No.
Ms. RANDALL. Eight thousand, eight hundred and forty-two,
which is 41 percent.
Following the domestic extremists tracker that George Wash-
ington University (GW) compiles, since 2015, there have been 643
individuals charged, 447 percent found guilty. Do you know how
many are men?
Mr. HUDSON. You tell me.
Ms. RANDALL. Ninety-five percent.
We can trot out all of the data that we want to create the sense
that there is a bad guy, there is a bad group of people, there are
folks who are not among us, there are folks who are other. And I
think we should spend a lot more time looking at ourselves, looking
42
at American citizens, looking at White men, who are committing vi-
olence at disproportionate rates in our country, who are committing
crimes at disproportionate rates in our country, including the
President of the United States who is sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, as so many of my colleagues have pointed out.
I also want to say, you know, I have heard a lot about the Somali
donors to political campaigns. We all acknowledge, right, that you
cannot donate to a political campaign in the United States unless
you are an American citizen, right? I am just going to, like, ac-
knowledge that.
You know who else is getting rich as a campaign donor at the
expense of the U.S. taxpayers and because of the decisions that
this government has made? Yes, Elon Musk, but also billionaire
Paul Singer, a Trump donor who is getting rich off the military ac-
tions that this President engaged in, in Venezuela.
Now, about childcare, $7 for every $1 spent on childcare and
early learning are returned to our U.S. economy. It is good for fam-
ilies. It is good for kids. It is good for our economic growth. But we
are still facing a childcare crisis in this country.
Chair Robbins, I understand that you have three kids and that
they were enrolled in daycare at one point before you became a
stay-at-home mom. What would your reaction be to an unknown,
potentially armed angry individual, showing up at your home with
a camera demanding to enter while your children were at home?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, we used a neighbor to do our childcare.
Ms. RANDALL. What if they showed up at your neighbor’s house?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I do not think she would—they would be com-
ing in, but——
Ms. RANDALL. How would you feel about it if someone who was
armed and angry showed up in the house where your children
were?
Ms. ROBBINS. I am not sure I understand. Who is armed? What
are you asking about?
Ms. RANDALL. Thank you. I imagine you would be scared. I think
many families would be scared if that happens to you. I want to
share a story of a provider from Washington State who said, fol-
lowing the fraud claims and the demonization of Somali Americans
and childcare providers, three adults came into her home and
banged on her door startling the children in her care. The children
were frightened and confused. She has been receiving repeated
death threats by phone and voice mail.
Individuals have returned multiple times, sometimes two or
three times a day, parking outside the home and monitoring activ-
ity. They recorded families arriving and leaving. As a result, fami-
lies felt unsafe and some withdrew their children from care. A
nearby provider closed their program entirely due to fear.
Another provider shared that she was approached by a man with
a gun outside her home who interrogated her about her childcare
program, and she is now too scared to step outside. Providers are
not answering the phone anymore because of all the threats, which
means that parents are not able to get in touch with staff regard-
ing their children’s care.
Mr. BIGGS. Order. Mr. Chairman, order.
43
Chairman COMER. Gentlelady’s time is expired. You went 30 sec-
onds over. As did Ms. Stansbury, so.
Ms. RANDALL. Thank you for your lenience, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Gosar from Arizona.
Mr. GOSAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the wit-
nesses for traveling.
Ms. Robbins, the Minnesota legislature led by your Committee
sounded the alarm on the fraud for years, but it was ignored by
Governor Walz. Did Keith Ellison, the Attorney General, also—was
he aware of this?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, he was aware of the fraud, and he came before
our Committee, and I feel like he did not do his job prosecuting
these cases. Most of the cases have been prosecuted federally by
the U.S. Attorney, both under President Biden in Feeding Our Fu-
ture and currently under President Trump.
Mr. GOSAR. So, he, in your state, is the top attorney for the pub-
lic, right?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. GOSAR. For the public. That is what I find very interesting.
Well, maybe it has to do something with the campaign contribu-
tions Attorney General Ellison and his son received from members
of Feeding Our Future, an organization now under investigation.
The same group whose members allegedly tried to bribe jurors, but
I am sure that is just a coincidence. Nothing to see here. Sounds
very familiar. Sounds very Biden crime syndicatedesque.
Now, when you are talking about the tools that you could use,
would any Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) that takes Fed-
eral funding be of value to you that they would have to disclose all
their Federal funding or all their funding mechanisms as they take
one penny from the Federal Government?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. One of the things we have seen in Minnesota
is that some of these nonprofits have had their Federal 501(c)(3)
status revoked, but the state continues to fund it.
Mr. GOSAR. It is interesting you say that, because you know, the
IRS actually does a study that actually has those numbers, but
when we order it, it is blanked out. It is redacted. All of it is re-
dacted. I wonder if there are some interesting aspects to that, you
know, follow-the-money trail.
Now, Representative Hudson, the head of Feeding Our Future
was sentenced in November for his role in the largest COVID fraud
scheme in United States history according to the DOJ. This is a
predictable result of the massive COVID spending with little or no
oversight. In fact, we spent between $4.3 and $7.5 trillion during
COVID, and we do not have a single receipt, not one. Okay?
Now, this is a predictable outcome from massive spending,
whether it is expanded COVID tax credits under the so called Af-
fordable Care Act or the programs like the massive Minnesota
HHS initiative with no enrollment cap. Unfortunately, there are
plenty of similar Federal programs right here in Washington, D.C.
My question for you is, in your experience, what failures make
government funding streams particularly susceptible to fraud?
Mr. HUDSON. Well, as I outlined in my opening statement, and
in my written testimony, basically we are spending far more money
than we have the operational capacity to monitor. Like, they are
44
just—now deputy U.S. Attorney, was U.S. Attorney at the time, Joe
Thompson, said we cannot prosecute our way out of this. That is
another way of saying it. We have to have controls on the front
end.
Mr. GOSAR. And with massive amounts, like I just talked to you
about in COVID, you know, it actually—it gives the environment
for fraud. It just builds on it, right?
Mr. HUDSON. Correct.
Mr. GOSAR. Well, Ms. Rarick, what concrete actions did Walz’s
Administration take to intimidate whistleblowers into silence?
Ms. RARICK. So, I think the first thing he did, was he put in
place commissioners. Right now, we have a deputy commissioner
over the Department of Human Services that is known to whistle-
blowers as being, like, the queen of retaliation, so when you put
somebody in charge that is known to retaliate, that is a problem.
I would also note on your previous question about the COVID
money, and we discovered in our Committee that the auditor—so
there was a bid for auditing the COVID–19 money, and the auditor
was known to be our Minnesota State Auditor Blaha, so that is an-
other Democrat within the whole fold of the Democrats involved as
well.
Mr. GOSAR. Would it surprise you that we spent $13 trillion from
Bill Clinton to Donald Trump in that span of time, $13 trillion with
not a single receipt?
Ms. RARICK. That is absolutely shocking. I used to do accounting,
and that is deplorable. That is something that you should be in
prison for that.
Mr. GOSAR. Absolutely. So, you know, the United States has no
obligation to tolerate guests who break our laws, and in this case,
there seems like there are a whole bunch of them, and unfortu-
nately, they were targeting one general area. And it is sad to me
that we are always being screamed at about xenophobia, all these
different types of phobias and racist, and yet, the facts still stand.
So, Mr. Chairman, I find it very interesting, today’s hearing, and
I applaud you for doing it. Thank you, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the lady
from Texas, Ms. Jasmine Crockett.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, may I do a UC?
Chairman COMER. I am sorry, Ms. Crockett. The Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Biggs.
Mr. BIGGS. I apologize for that.
Chairman COMER. That is alright.
Mr. BIGGS. There are some more UCs. ‘‘Senator John Kennedy
brings Somali fraud to the Senate Floor.’’ ‘‘Viral Video’s David says
he Filed Complaint Against Walz Over Fraud Allegations.’’ ‘‘Min-
nesota adds Medicaid Fraud Verification Amid Alleged $9 Billion
Loss.’’ ‘‘Minnesota Somali Fraudsters Paid for Rich Lifestyles with
Stolen Money.’’ ‘‘What Investigators Still Haven’t Asked about Min-
nesota’s Fraud,’’ I hope to ask that. ‘‘Trump Deploys 2,000 Federal
Agents to Minnesota.’’ ‘‘Venezuela Has Been Dealt with; Somali
Scammers Should be Next.’’ ‘‘Beyond Parity: Craigslist Ad from a
Day Care Center in Minneapolis Seeks to Hire 20 Child Actors.’’
‘‘Dr. Oz Orders Full Scale Federal Audit of Minnesota Medicaid.’’
‘‘Did You Miss a Story about Alleged Medicaid Fraud from a Soma-
45
lian-run Health Services Provider in Maine?’’ ‘‘A YouTubers Follow-
up Video on Minnesota Fraud is Just as Wild.’’ ‘‘HHS to Close
Biden Era Loophole that Lets States Pay Child Care Providers
Without Counting Attendance.’’ Yield back. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Jasmine Crockett from Texas.
Ms. CROCKETT. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and for every wit-
ness that is here, thank you so much for your time and your atten-
tion.
I just have one quick question. I have not been here the entire
hearing, but I do not think this question has been posed for each
of you, and we can start at the far end. Do you believe that all So-
malis are engaged in fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. I do not, and I would like to——
Ms. CROCKETT. Okay. Just yes or no. Next.
Mr. HUDSON. Of course not.
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely not. We have good Somali people in our
state.
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely not.
Ms. CROCKETT. Okay. Thank you so much. I just want to make
sure I level set, because it seems like we want to continue to, espe-
cially as we just heard those particular articles entered into the
record, we want to continue to just make it seem as if you are So-
mali, then somehow you are a fraudster, and this Administration
has decided that it wants a target on their backs. And so when my
colleague, Ms. Randall, decided that she wanted to talk about the
threats that are being made toward various Somali people, the rea-
son she brought it up is because this particular side of the aisle has
a tendency of if one person does something bad, especially if they
are an immigrant, then we are going to cast aside that entire com-
munity. So, I wanted to level set, and I appreciate your honesty,
because that is something that we very rarely get from our col-
leagues on the other side of the aisle.
In fact, if we want to talk about fraud, I got a lot of fraud that
we are going to talk about, because we going to get into this, but
I am very curious to hear—you know, let me ask you, Mr. Ballou,
are you aware of allegations that $50,000 in taxpayer dollars have
been given to someone that is currently sitting in this Administra-
tion by the name of Tom Homan? Are you aware? Okay. That is
a yes?
Mr. BALLOU. I am.
Ms. CROCKETT. Okay. And last I checked, and correct me if I am
wrong if you have different information, but he was given that
$50,000 in exchange for being able to provide contracts and kick-
backs to people as soon as Trump was going to get into office. The
DOJ was actually investigating this, but as soon as Trump got into
office, last I checked, he actually said go ahead and throw away
that case.
Mr. BALLOU. So, it was a Department of Justice investigation
and he accepted the money from an undercover FBI agent in cash.
Ms. CROCKETT. Are you aware as to whether or not we ever got
that $50,000 back?
Mr. BALLOU. I am not.
46
Ms. CROCKETT. Oh, okay. Are you aware as to whether or not
this Committee has decided to investigate that?
Mr. BALLOU. I am not.
Ms. CROCKETT. Are you aware as to whether or not any com-
mittee in Congress has decided to investigate the fact that we
know that he took $50,000 from an undercover officer and yet we
still do not have that money nor does he have any charges?
Mr. BALLOU. I am not.
Ms. CROCKETT. Oh, okay. All right. So, let us get into it. We are
living through the most corrupt Presidential administration in
American history, a $300 million ballroom, a $230 million payout
from the Department of Justice because the President got his feel-
ings hurt because he has to be investigated for being a criminal,
hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars spent at Trump-owned
properties around the country, Trump branded wine being sold at
the Coast Guard exchanges, American taxpayer dollars being spent
on DHS propaganda ads on Truth Social, awarding Federal con-
tracts to corporations in exchange for campaign contributions. Kash
Patel flew his girlfriend around the country on a multimillion-dol-
lar jet that taxpayers paid for. Kristi Noem gave companies she is
affiliated with hundreds of millions of tax dollars, then went out
and spent another $200 million on two private jets for her travel.
For 12 months, this Administration has been taking billions of
taxpayer dollars from American people and have been giving it
away to their own companies in the form of tax cuts, government
contracts, or other government-funded subsidies. So, Congress has
a role in getting rid of fraud, I will admit that, in any federally
funded government program.
However, I think the fraud that the American people are con-
cerned about is that the Republicans are taking away American’s
healthcare so that ultra billionaires can get more tax cuts. The real
fraud is the dehumanization and demonization of the working-class
Americans and immigrants to distract folks away from corporate
socialism that is happening because of the Republicans, so this is
truly the definition of throwing away the baby with the bath water.
The Republican philosophy is that if the cost of living for the av-
erage American increases, they are on their own, but if the cost of
doing business increases for the wealthiest people on earth, well,
then it is the government’s job to bail them out.
But I want to get to my last question, because Mr. Ballou, I got
to give you a chance. He has been issuing pardons for numerous
people who have defrauded the American people, and Republicans
on this Committee, yes, just as quiet as the room just got, right?
So, Mr. Ballou, talk to me about how the Trump Administration
has welcomed fraud across government by purging DOJ attorneys
and shuttering ethics offices across the Federal Government.
Mr. BALLOU. Well, you know, one of the things that has been a
common theme in this discussion so far is potential government
employee involvement in some of these schemes. That has not been
proven yet, but it does seem to be alleged. The concern that I have,
is the office that would prosecute that in the Department of Jus-
tice, the public integrity section, has been largely defunded and
decimated.
47
Ms. CROCKETT. Thank you so much. My time is expired, but I do
have some UCs, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Do you want to do them now?
Ms. CROCKETT. I do.
Chairman COMER. Okay.
Ms. CROCKETT. The first one is from Truthout. ‘‘Trump Grants
Clemency to Executive who led $205 million Medicare Fraud
Scheme.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. CROCKETT. The next one is, ‘‘Trump Commutes Sentence of
Dr. Salomon Melgen, Eye Doctor Found Guilty of Medicare Fraud.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. CROCKETT. The next one, ‘‘Healthcare Fraudster Philip
Esformes is Latest Trump Clemency Recipient to be Arrested.’’ He
defrauded more than $1 billion from Medicare.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. CROCKETT. ‘‘Trump Pardons Nursing Home Owner and Sup-
porter Convicted of $7 Million in Tax Evasion.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
And we will want all that stuff to put in the record.
Ms. CROCKETT. I will. I got you. ‘‘Trump Pardons Cost Victims
and Taxpayers $1.3 Billion, House Judiciary Committee Democrats’
Review Said.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Biggs.
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. I have a request to be recognized to make a motion.
Chairman COMER. I am sorry?
Ms. MACE. I have a request to be recognized to make a motion.
Chairman COMER. Yes, go ahead.
Ms. MACE. I move that the Committee issue a subpoena to the
Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services for all records related to the immigration and
naturalization of, or any immigration benefit received by, Ilhan
Omar of Minnesota, Ahmed Abdi Salan Hirsi also known as Ahmed
Aden, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, and any members of Ilhan Omar’s
family.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Another motion was just made. The
Committee will hold this motion in abeyance until the end of to-
day’s hearing. The Committee will now proceed with today’s hear-
ing. Thank you, Ms. Mace.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
A report that came out yesterday indicates that on average, al-
most $1 million a day in cash is being sent from Minnesota out of
the country by a small group of Somali carriers. Are any of you fa-
miliar with that on the panel?
Ms. ROBBINS. I am not familiar with that particular story, but
that story has been in Minnesota for a long time where millions of
dollars has gone out of Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP) airport in cash
to Somali.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this be admitted to this
hearing.
48
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you. The Biden Administration required states
to pay healthcare and daycare providers before verifying any at-
tendance at a daycare and before care was delivered. Would you
say that policy facilitated the funneling of funds or defrauding of
government funds? We will start with—we will go down the panel
and start with Representative Robbins, please.
Ms. ROBBINS. My understanding is that there were not ever
enough internal controls, but under Medicaid rules, the Walz Ad-
ministration already had the opportunity to stop payment when
there were credible allegations of fraud. They had the opportunity
to do prepayment review. They could do all of those things, and
they did not use those tools.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Hudson?
Mr. HUDSON. Not only does paying people before they deliver a
service introduce an obvious opportunity for people to abscond with
public dollars, but we have heard these arguments in our commit-
tees back in Minnesota from Minnesota Democrats that it is just
so important that we pay people up front because they cannot af-
ford to wait for the reimbursements.
Mr. BIGGS. Ms. Rarick.
Ms. RARICK. Yes. This is absolutely counter to good accounting
and good accountability, so I would definitely say that you should
be providing service and getting paid after.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Ballou, what do you think?
Mr. BALLOU. I cannot speak to that policy only because I am
learning about it just now, but I will say, you know——
Mr. BIGGS. Wait, wait, so then the question then is, do you think
it is a good idea to pay for the service up front before it is delivered
and without accounting?
Mr. BALLOU. You know, I can only speak to the criminal side of
things, not the administrative side, by my concern here, again, is
to the extent that there would be violations because of that change,
the office responsible for prosecuting that——
Mr. BIGGS. Okay. So, you did not want to answer the question.
You want to filibuster. Thanks, brother. Appreciate it.
Now, here where we are going to go is one of the things that you
mentioned, Representative Robbins, is fiscal facilities and real es-
tate. And as we have seen and looked at this, as I have looked at
this, all of the public reporting that is out there, looked at a little
bit of exhibit A, that is like 2,800 pages, 2,300, whatever it is, did
not get to look at all of it but looked at some of it, I want to know
did anybody go in and find out who is owning all these properties?
Because you have basically vacant properties, ostensibly holding
themselves out to be daycare centers. Who owns those properties?
Anybody looked into that?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, some of our staff is looking at it currently, and
I would encourage people to think about this as you look at your
other states. We have people who own the properties and then
other people related to them or close to them that provide the serv-
ices, and they both get remuneration, and then we have people who
homestead assisted living facilities, small, single-family homes, and
say it is a business, but then they should not be allowed to home-
stead. We have instances where there are multiple assisted living
49
facilities that have been homesteaded, so the ownership of the
properties and the ownership of the business is very important.
This has gotten to be such a problem in Minnesota that people in-
vest in the daycare business as an investment. And so, getting not
only who runs the facility but who the ownership is, is critical, be-
cause that is where a lot of the money goes.
Mr. BIGGS. That is my point is that you are setting up a series
and facilitating straw man purchases of actual real property to ac-
tually launder or hide money coming from the state and defraud
the state, and I would encourage both the feds and the state to
really take a close look at that.
I did find it interesting—well, let me just ask the last question
I have got time for here is, well, I got to ask two. The $18 billion,
I am saying $18 billion. That is the total nut over the last five
years, if I understand your testimony right, Representative Hud-
son, and half of it was defrauded.
Mr. HUDSON. That is the estimate from the U.S. Attorney’s Of-
fice.
Mr. BIGGS. Okay. Has the Walz Administration put into place
any new procedures since this has come to a very viral head in the
last, you know, six weeks?
Mr. HUDSON. They have appointed a couple of guys and shifted
around a couple of chairs on the deck, but it is the equivalent of
throwing a glass of water at a stove that is on fire.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have a few more UCs, if I may.
Chairman COMER. Go ahead.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you. ‘‘Victims Shocked after Biden Grants
Clemency to Kids for Cash Judge and $54 Million Embezzler.’’
Shocked. ‘‘Biden Clemency for Convicted Fraudsters Met with Out-
rage—It’s a Slap in the Face.’’ ‘‘Comer on Fox News, Biden Crime
Family Pardon Serve as a Confession of Their Corruption.’’ ‘‘Biden
Pardons More People in his Criminal Clan and Commutes Sentence
of Leonard Peltier.’’ Op-ed from the former—the legislative auditor
Jim Nobles, ‘‘What is the ‘Right’ Number?’’ And then, finally, Mr.
Chairman, 18 U.S. Code 666, theft or bribery concerning programs
receiving Federal funds, seems apt in this case. Mr. Chairman, I
yield back. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recog-
nizes Ms. Pressley from Massachusetts.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me just begin by mak-
ing this claim. Credible fraud must be investigated and prevented.
Every dollar that is stolen from public programs is a dollar that is
taken from a child who needs care, a senior who needs food, or a
family that is already struggling to make ends meet.
Ms. Robbins, I want to just begin with a basic question, and
please answer yes or no. When someone is convicted of defrauding
the public, do you believe that they should be held accountable?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Ms. PRESSLEY. So, if we are serious about fraud, then we also
have to be serious about accountability. Ms. Robbins, do you mind
just expounding, what does accountability look like to you?
50
Ms. ROBBINS. We want to prosecute everyone who has committed
a crime, and we want to fire officials in the agencies that are liable
for allowing the failure of internal controls.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Okay. So, Ms. Robbins, let me be more clear.
What should happen to fraudsters who steal public dollars?
Ms. ROBBINS. They should go to jail.
Ms. PRESSLEY. So, in my opinion, you know, accountability
means restitution, it means consequences, like incarceration, that
help ensure that it does not happen again, you know, as a real de-
terrent in accountability. It means that money taken from families
and the public is returned to them.
But that is not the standard that is being set by Donald Trump
who is wielding his clemency authority to allow fraudsters to es-
cape accountability altogether. Last month my office published a
clemency report titled ‘‘Trump’s Clemency Gap, How Trump’s Par-
dons are Ignoring the People Who Need Them the Most.’’ I ask
unanimous consent to enter this into the record.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Thank you.
Now to the witnesses who serve in the Minnesota State Legisla-
ture on the Fraud Prevention Committee, let us walk through
these pardons for fraudsters, and we all care about fraud. So, Ms.
Robbins, Mr. Hudson, and Ms. Rarick, Donald Trump pardoned
George Santos who defrauded voters and owed them $370,000 in
restitution to victims. Raise your hand if you oppose this pardon.
Thank you, Mr. Ballou.
Ms. ROBBINS. Ma’am, I would have to look at the law and the
facts of the case. We cannot know the facts of all these individual
cases.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Please, no, do not deflect. This is a very public
case. You know who George Santos is. You know exactly what he
did. We just agreed that, you know, fraud is unacceptable, and so
you just talked about accountability. You said if people commit
fraud and exploit the public good that they should be incarcerated,
so this is not a complicated question.
So, I will give you all one more opportunity. Ms. Robbins, Mr.
Hudson, and Ms. Rarick, raise your hand if you oppose the pardon
of George Santos.
Mr. HUDSON. Not playing this game.
Ms. PRESSLEY. It is not a game. It is real life. It is not a game
at all. Okay. I will take your refusal to go on record not only as
cowardice, but that you do agree with that pardon of that
fraudster.
Moving on, Donald Trump also gave, and this has never been
done before, Presidential pardons to corporations that committed
fraud. One example is the crypto company BitMEX that violated
U.S. law and was fined $100 million. Now, raise your hand if you
oppose Trump’s pardon of this crypto company.
Mr. HUDSON. Not participating.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Thank you, Mr. Ballou. Again, I will take your re-
fusal to not—to raise your hand in opposition, that means that you
support this pardon of this corporation that frauded folks to the
tune of $100 million.
Mr. HUDSON. Refusal to participate is not an expression.
51
Ms. PRESSLEY. Yesterday—reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my
time.
Mr. HUDSON. Refusal to participate is not expression one way or
the other.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Do you know the rules of Committee? This is my
time.
Mr. HUDSON. I know that I am here——
Ms. PRESSLEY. You will not speak over me.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. As a member of the public——
Ms. PRESSLEY. Reclaiming my time. You were not——
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. That you serve. That is what I know.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair? You are not in order with
the rules of the Committee. This is my time. This is my time.
Mr. HUDSON. And it is our dollars.
Ms. PRESSLEY. I ask the questions and you answer, but you are
too much of a coward to answer, so we are going to move on. Now,
yesterday was the five-year anniversary, and I want to note, of the
January 6 insurrection, and on Donald Trump’s first day in office,
he pardoned 1,500 insurrectionists, including Brian Christopher
Mock, who is from Minnesota. Are you all going to say you do not
know who that is? He is from Minnesota.
Now, he kicked, shoved, and threw a flagpole at police officers.
You know law enforcement that you claim to support? And he did
all of that in the name of fraud. He was an election denier. So, an
election fraud lie. Now, he claims he did these things in the name
of patriotism, but really he is just a criminal, so raise your hand
if you oppose Trump’s pardon of this Minnesota individual.
Ms. ROBBINS. Ma’am, this grandstanding nonsense——
Ms. PRESSLEY. This is not grandstanding.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Is exactly what Minnesotans hate
about D.C.
Ms. PRESSLEY. This is accountability. This is accountability and
you are hypocrites. So, again, I will take your refusal——
Mr. HUDSON. Thanks for demonstrating my opening statement.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Excuse me, reclaiming my time.
Ms. MACE. Decorum. She is off the rails.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Reclaiming my time. I am not off the rails. Please.
Ms. MACE. You are totally off the rails.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Enough with your tropes, Nancy. Enough with
your tropes. Give me my time back.
Mr. BIGGS. Order. Order, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. PRESSLEY. If Republicans were serious—reclaiming my time.
Mr. Chair?
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady’s time is expired.
Mr. HUDSON. You serve me and my constituents.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my time.
Ms. MACE. You are out of time.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my time. Mr.
Chair, I lost at least ten seconds from my——
Ms. MACE. You are out of time.
Chairman COMER. Time is expired.
Ms. MACE. Out of order and out of time.
Chairman COMER. Ms. Pressley, you have already secured your
MSNBC spot tonight. Your time is expired.
52
Ms. PRESSLEY. I am not looking—I am looking for accountability.
And you want to run from accountability and your king——
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. You are going to be so good on MSNBC.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
Ms. PRESSLEY [continuing]. And this Administration.
Ms. MACE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Chairman, I
agree, she is going to be a great host on MSNBC.
Ms. PRESSLEY. You do not care about hungry children, or you
would not to be cutting Medicaid.
Ms. MACE. This is my time. I reclaim my time.
Chairman COMER. I would not want to jump in front of Ms. Mace
if I were you, Ms. Pressley.
Ms. MACE. I reclaim my time. This is my time.
Chairman COMER. I would not want to interrupt Ms. Mace. It is
her time. The Chair recognizes——
Ms. PRESSLEY. My time was interrupted, Mr. Chair.
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chair, she did not get all her time.
Mr. HUDSON. She wants to insult us for ten more seconds.
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman, she is still out of order. What do we
have to do to get this woman in order?
Chairman COMER. Your time is expired. The Chair recognizes
Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. You are going to be great on TV. You are really good.
Ms. PRESSLEY. I am very much in order.
Ms. MACE. No, baby, you are not. No, baby, you are not. You are
not in order. You are out of order.
Ms. PRESSLEY. You are not the——
Ms. MACE. Goodbye. You are done. Mr. Chairman, is my 5 min-
utes——
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. Are we good here? Mr. Chairman, thank you. As I lis-
ten to the witnesses answer questions today, I am struck by the
truly breathtaking amount of fraud, the scope and scale per-
petrated against the American people by Somalians in Minnesota,
screeching Democrats like you just heard at our witnesses. Demo-
crats on this Committee do not want to talk about Minnesota fraud
because Minnesota fraud is Democrat fraud.
You are going to make a great host on MSNBC. You are going
to be great.
And this is a cover up, I mean, the very definition of cover up.
And so, while we are still trying to understand the scale of the
fraud, it appears that the amount of fraud we are talking about
could exceed the size of GDP in Somalia, the size of its economy
is what we are talking about, so let that sink in, the amount of
fraud we are talking about.
My first question is to Mr. Ballou, this afternoon. Should Soma-
lians in Minnesota be required to speak English? They are citizens.
Mr. BALLOU. One, I just——
Ms. MACE. Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU. I am here for——
Ms. MACE. Should they be required to speak English if they are
American citizens?
Mr. BALLOU. I think that question is really inappropriate.
53
Ms. MACE. Should they—it is not inappropriate. This is the
United States of America. Do you speak English? Should Ameri-
cans speak English? Citizens speak English? Yes or no?
Mr. MIN. Point of inquiry. Is English the official language of the
United States? It is a question——
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman, I am being interrupted again by an-
other——
Chairman COMER. It is not a valid parliament inquiry.
Ms. MACE. I would like to reclaim my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. MIN. Is it not a citizenship requirement?
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reclaim my time.
Mr. MIN. She is asking the witness.
Ms. MACE. That seems to be a popular theme today.
Chairman COMER. That is not a valid inquiry.
Ms. MACE. Women have the right to speak in this Committee.
Conservative women have a right to speak here and not be inter-
rupted.
Chairman COMER. A day late and a dollar short. Ms. Pressley
has already got that MSNBC slot.
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reclaim my time.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. I believe I have lost, like, ten seconds there.
Chairman COMER. Okay. We will give you ten seconds.
Ms. MACE. Okay. My next question is should Somalians who
committed fraud be denaturalized and deported, Mr. Ballou?
Mr. BALLOU. Again——
Ms. MACE. Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. I am not sure that is an appropriate
question because the majority of Somalian Minnesotans are citi-
zens.
Ms. MACE. If you commit fraud in this country and you are here
from Somalia, you do not believe they should be denaturalized and
deported? How much fraud would it take for you to want to
denaturalize and deport someone who committed fraud in this
country? How much?
Mr. BALLOU. Again——
Ms. MACE. A billion, $9 billion? $19 billion? What would it take
for you?
Mr. BALLOU. Most Somali Minnesotans are citizens.
Ms. MACE. Right. And the ones that committed fraud, the ques-
tion was, if you understand English, should be—those who com-
mitted fraud, should they be denaturalized and deported, the So-
malians who are here, the ones that cannot speak English?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes, so under U.S. law——
Ms. MACE. Okay. My next question for you.
Mr. BALLOU. Can I please finish the question?
Ms. MACE. No, you cannot, because you are not answering the
question. My next question is—this is yes or no. If you marry your
brother and you commit immigration fraud, should you be
denaturalized and deported?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, that——
Ms. MACE. If you commit immigration fraud, yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU. Again, that question seems really inappropriate,
and if I can get back to the question——
54
Ms. MACE. You cannot answer my question, so that is probably
more inappropriate. Can you name one significant contribution to
Minnesota from a Somali immigrant who cannot speak English?
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely yes, but again, this is——
Ms. MACE. You did not name one. All right. So, my next ques-
tions are going to be for Hon. Ms. Robbins. Good afternoon. Thank
you all for being here today. I heard some discussion earlier about
Al-Shabaab and the discovery that you believe some of this money
that was defrauded the U.S. Government went to Al-Shabaab. Is
that correct? Did I hear that right?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. It has been proven.
Ms. MACE. How much money are we talking about?
Ms. ROBBINS. You know, we do not have an amount, so there has
been specific cases where it has been charged where we have an
amount, but then of the millions that go to Somalia over the years
in remittances, a portion of that we understand is taken as sort of
a tax or, you know, corruption by Al-Shabaab when it enters the
country.
Ms. MACE. Can you explain to us who Al-Shabaab is.
Ms. ROBBINS. It is a terrorist organization in Somalia.
Ms. MACE. And they are affiliated with Al Qaeda. Is that right?
Ms. ROBBINS. My understanding is they are.
Ms. MACE. I am on the Director of National Intelligence (DNI)
website where it tells me that since 2014 Al-Shabaab has killed
more U.S. citizens than any other Al Qaeda affiliate, and as of
2025, Al-Shabaab, this group, is Al Qaeda’s wealthiest component.
Can you believe that?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Ms. MACE. And that American tax dollars, through Minnesota,
through Governor Tim Walz, who shamefully had to resign from
his reelection the other day, thank you to the young YouTuber Nick
Shirley, this is the kind of thing that was happening in Minnesota.
So, I praise the Republicans who are here today from the Min-
nesota State Legislature exposing this fraud. And then, Ms. Rob-
bins, when do you think Tim Walz became aware of the fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. I think he has been aware of it since the begin-
ning. This was a huge issue in our state in the year he ran for Gov-
ernor and the OLA reports came out first identifying the childcare
fraud in March and April 2019 when he was in the first months
of his term.
Ms. MACE. Was Keith Ellison in on it, too, knowledgeable? The
Catholic turned Muslim guy in Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. They were all newly in office, and this was
very public knowledge in Minnesota.
Ms. MACE. What role do you think Tim Walz and Keith Ellison
played—his Administration in delaying investigations into the
fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, I have outlined several things where they
stopped our ability to strengthen internal controls and they also
shut down the criminal investigations by the OIG and DHS.
Ms. MACE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I do have two
articles, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to ask unanimous con-
sent.
Chairman COMER. Proceed.
55
Ms. MACE. This one on FoxNews.com, ‘‘Minnesota Fraud Probe
Will Expand to Other States,’’ and then on House.gov, ‘‘Legislators
Blast DHS for Revelations that it had Contracts with Feeding Our
Future Fraudsters.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. MACE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes—does somebody else
seek recognition? The Chair recognizes Ms. Ansari.
Ms. ANSARI. Mr. Chair, I would like to start with a UC request.
An article from The Washington Post titled, ‘‘Trump Amplifies Con-
spiracy Theories on Killing of Minnesota Lawmaker.’’ As we know,
the President shared a video.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. ANSARI. Thank you. So, I want to start with this question
for the lawmakers here from Minnesota. As you know, Donald
Trump has been posting these conspiracy theories about the link-
ing Governor Walz to the killing of your former Speaker, and in-
sinuating that Governor Walz had something to do with it. Can you
please raise your hand if you think this is an appropriate action
by the President of the United States. Raise your hand, please.
Ms. ROBBINS. I am not doing a raise your hand. I am happy to
comment on it.
Ms. ANSARI. Sure. Is it appropriate for the President to do that?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, the person who murdered our colleague, Speak-
er Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark, had in his——
Ms. ANSARI. Answer the question. Do you think it is appropriate
for the President of the United States——
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. In his vehicle, evidence saying he
thought Tim Walz——
Ms. ANSARI [continuing]. To cause violence against a sitting Gov-
ernor.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Was ordering him to do it. I know the
facts will come out in the case and we need to be respectful of the
Hortman family and we need to let this play out in the courts.
Ms. ANSARI. That is unacceptable and it is inappropriate to the
highest degree for the President of the United States to be sharing
conspiracy theories that are obviously going to lead to violence di-
rected at Governor Tim Walz.
Now moving on to the issue here today, we all care deeply about
combating waste, fraud, preventing corruption, and holding bad ac-
tors accountable. Unfortunately, this country has seen an unprece-
dented avalanche of such abuse in the past year, all stemming from
the Trump Administration, the most corrupt and the most wasteful
administration in American history. It is truly amazing that the
Majority moves so quickly to hold basically an emergency hearing
on the situation in Minnesota without ever one time having held
a hearing on the national crisis that is the Trump criminal enter-
prise being run out of the White House. I do not even know where
to begin.
Maybe the Republican Majority would be interested in holding a
hearing on the $50,000 cash bribe that border czar Tom Homan re-
ceived from FBI undercover agents in a Cava bag. Or how about
a hearing on the $400 million bribe that Donald Trump presented
by multi-billion-dollar companies in the form of the White House
56
ballroom that Donald Trump seems most obsessed with? Do Repub-
licans have any interest in holding a hearing on that corruption
scandal? Or the fraudsters and the criminals that Donald Trump
has pardoned? He freed George Santos, convicted of theft of public
funds. He pardoned Paul Walczak convicted of millions of dollars
in tax fraud after Walczak’s mother raised money for Trump’s cam-
paign.
He released the former President of Honduras sentenced to 45
years for flooding the United States with oceans of cocaine. And
these are just a few examples. I have not even brought up DOGE
and Elon Musk corruptions, Trump’s firing of Inspectors General
who are in place to root out fraud, and career U.S. attorneys who
are doing the bidding of Donald Trump and prosecuting his per-
sonal and political enemies. Is there any interest in holding an
oversight hearing on any of those issues?
Now, I want to talk about one specifically appalling instance of
blatant corruption in the Trump White House reported by The New
York Times that the Republican Majority has shown literally zero
interest in investigating. This is regarding World Liberty Financial,
the cryptocurrency company founded in 2024 by Eric Trump, Don-
ald Trump Jr., Alex Witkoff, and Zack Witkoff, among others. If
those names sound familiar, it is because the company is a joint
project by the Trump and Witkoff families—Steve Witkoff being
Trump’s special envoy in the Middle East.
You may think that the President’s financial interests in a secre-
tive cryptocurrency exchange may be bad enough, but it gets so
much worse than that. Emirati investment firm MGX invested $2
billion in the Trump-Witkoff crypto business personally enriching
the sitting President of the United States, his family, and Witkoff
as a White House employee.
This is at the same time that Witkoff is an envoy to the Middle
East. He is the one negotiating with the Emiratis as an official
Representative of the U.S. Government.
While Witkoff and his sons were negotiating this private crypto
deal, Steve Witkoff was also in charge of negotiating with the very
same officials as a U.S. official to give the Emiratis something they
desperately wanted from us: highly advanced and specialized com-
puter chips.
To make the corruption even more explicit, just after the crypto
deal went through, Donald Trump gave his go ahead for the trans-
fer of hundreds of thousands of advanced chips to the Emiratis de-
spite the extremely concerning national security implications. It is
perhaps one of the largest and most obvious corruption schemes in
United States history implicating a foreign government, paying off
the President of the United States and the White House to the
tune of literally billions of dollars in exchange for sensitive U.S.
technologies. So, please let the Republicans spare us with their
feign concerns about waste, fraud, and corruption. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Fallon from Texas.
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
We are here today in this hearing because there is this damning
overwhelming evidence of massive industrial scale fraud occurring
in Minnesota right now and has been going on for years. This is
57
a huge story, and while many want to ignore it, deflect from it, or
be masters of obfuscation, which we have seen here today, this
should be a page one front and center above the fold headline for
media outlets across the country, but it is not. And I think it is
very interesting. ABC, NBC, CBS, you can find 74 stories today
run before you even get a hint of this scandal. This should be a
headline, and unfortunately, it is a back-page fine print.
Still, as bad as the network’s coverage, albeit, you know, it is lu-
dicrously abysmal, it is better than CNN. This very morning CNN
ran 51 stories on its website, including such riveting breaking news
articles such as dogs that are trained to sniff mold, a flock of gay
sheep, K-Pop’s newest release entitled Demon Hunters, inside
glimpse of P Diddy Combs’ prison cell, and Chinese robots playing
soccer, but nary a mention of the tens of billions of dollars of Amer-
ican taxpayer money that has been stolen from honest folk in
America by scumbag thieves.
This is the Oversight Committee. We should have one overriding
emotion, whether it is Republican or Democrat. We should all be
outraged that crooks and thieves and dirt bags are robbing the
American people. So, I was very curious to see how the Democrats
would play today. Would they expose this fraud and be willing to
work with us? Or would they go to their playbook of Donald Trump
bad—and when we were in DOGE, it was Elon Musk and billion-
aires bad—and they did not—they have not really disappointed.
January 6 as well has been mentioned. Has nothing to do with
what we are talking about today.
The Ranking Member’s opening comments even bizarrely talked
about Presidential pardons and he railed against POTUS. It has
nothing to do with the matter at hand, but for the record, Joe
Biden issued 250 percent more pardons and commutations than
Donald Trump. In fact, 2,545 more.
Again, back to the matter. This money has been stolen system-
ically by a gang of thieves while the very people charged with the
oversight, mainly the Walz Administration, have been complicit.
They have looked the other way. And the Democrats did not dis-
appoint either with isms and phobes, quotes like bigotry and ha-
tred, and we are a hypocritical witchhunt, and then they were tak-
ing the hero, Nick Shirley, trying to make him a villain.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into the record an article.
‘‘It’s Not Racist to Notice Somali Fraud.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. FALLON. 98 defendants that have been charged thus far in
this case, and I think it will end up being hundreds, 85 of them
happen to be of Somalian descent. It is just a fact, despite how un-
fortunate and inconvenient these truths may be to leftists. The As-
sistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson thinks that this fraud can
equate to maybe $9 billion. The entire Federal budget of the coun-
try of Somalia is $1.2 billion.
Medicaid fraud does exist in all 50 states, but uncovering it ag-
gressively clearly is not a blue-state priority. If you talk to any ex-
pert, I was in the state legislature for eight years, they will tell you
objectively that no matter where it is, about 10 to 20 percent of all
Medicaid spending is fraudulent. In the State of New York, they
spent $96 billion, so did they recover in fraud $9.6 billion, $960
58
million? No. It was a pittance. It was six one hundredths of one
percent was recovered. In the State of Minnesota, $18 billion. It
was eight one hundredths of one percent recovered.
Representative Robbins and the other reps, thank you for com-
ing. Thank you for your courage. You know you are going to be, you
know, smeared and I am not going to ask you where is your hand?
We are going to have a conversation. Okay? When, Representative
Robbins, when you first uncovered this titanic fraud, what was the
reaction and actions taken by the Walz Administration or Demo-
cratic colleagues? Was it working hand in hand to create synergy
and offer full support and help to unmask this fraud, or did you
face significant headwinds and fierce pushback to the point of oppo-
sition?
Ms. ROBBINS. Throughout our hearings, they would either deny
or deflect or say oh, they have handled it or they are new on the
job and they do not know. So, those were the answers and the
tenor of our hearing. I provided documents to them outlining, as
I said in February, of 72 childcare centers I thought they should
look at. They have not done it. I have sent six FOIA requests, or
data requests, that have not been responded to, so they have not
been good partners in rooting this out.
Mr. FALLON. So, block votes Minnesota in 2016 it was so close
that I think Hillary Clinton won the state by about 44,000 votes,
but if you have blocked 50,000 you can rely on in Minneapolis, that
is rather helpful to win an election in Minnesota. But you know
what, Mr. Chairman? Our Democratic colleagues, whether it be in
Minnesota or here on this Oversight Committee, they will eventu-
ally lear. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recog-
nizes Ms. Simon—or Mr. Bell from Missouri.
Mr. BELL. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Ranking Member, and our wit-
nesses for being here today. I believe in protecting our social serv-
ices and recognize the need for comprehensive legislation that en-
sures transparency in the collection and use of Federal funds to
support these critical programs that serve our communities in
need. The resources provided through social services ensure the
welfare of the everyday person and family, and these resources and
individuals deserve to be protected. These protections should come
at all times, not just when politically beneficial.
What we are witnessing from President Trump and this Admin-
istration is an attempt to use social services and the welfare of the
American people as pawns to promote their political agenda. In-
stead of caring for the challenges of the average person, this Ad-
ministration has deprived them of the very things that the Presi-
dent promised, which is affordable healthcare, housing, and relief
from the rising cost of living.
Through rolling back essential healthcare affordability, cutting
funding for assistance programs, implementing harmful tariffs, and
advancing legislation such as the one big ugly bill, the Administra-
tion’s actions have ultimately caused more harm than good for the
American people.
Reports show that since taking office, President Trump has
raised the average cost of living. Health insurance costs have risen
by hundreds of dollars for the average person with insurance plans
59
increasing by more than 20 percent. Housing costs remain at an
all-time high. And everyday grocery items show a steady increase
with prices rising by 15 to 20 percent.
We cannot pick and choose when to care for the American people.
The actions of this Administration show a pattern. They first target
our most vulnerable communities, and then gut the very resources
to help them. Today, it is our Somali communities and our
childcare assistance. Tomorrow, it could be your communities and
the resources you and your family rely on for well-being.
At its core, this is about the well-being of the American people.
If we truly cared about those we have sworn to represent, we would
be working to dismantle all the challenges they face, not just the
ones that serve political interest.
Mr. Ballou, President Trump has recently made comments on ef-
forts to freeze childcare funding in California, Colorado, Illinois,
and New York. Would these actions benefit or harm children and
families?
Mr. BALLOU. Oh, of course they are going to harm it.
Mr. BELL. President Trump has fired thousands of employees
across critical departments and has issued executive order 14356
restricting agencies from filling vacant positions or creating new
ones unless approved under the order or required by law. Can you
speak to how these actions could harm the government’s ability to
root out waste, fraud, and abuse?
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely. So, you know, it is going to make it
harder both to administer these services and then to identify fraud
in the first place. One of the things that I am particularly con-
cerned about is to go after fraud, one of the easiest ways to do it
is to prosecute tax crimes, you know. The challenge that we have
got right now is the Administration has announced a plan to dis-
band the tax division of the Department of Justice entirely, and
that is going to make it much harder to prosecute these sorts of
crimes.
Mr. BELL. And can you speak from your work as a Federal pros-
ecutor on how President Trump’s actions have contradicted his
promises to the American people.
Mr. BALLOU. Well, to the extent that this Administration says
that it cares about waste, fraud, and abuse, you know, it seems like
that is a selective care. You can look at cases like Paul Walczak
who, you know, was convicted of fraud and withheld $10 million to
his own employees in nursing homes. His mother attended a $1
million a plate fundraiser with the President and Mr. Walczak was
quickly pardoned.
This has happened literally dozens of times where favored de-
fendants either had their prosecutions dropped or were pardoned
entirely.
Mr. BELL. Okay. Thank you. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recog-
nizes Mr. Grothman from Wisconsin.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Sure. I am sorry, we had another briefing in the
building, so I do not want to go over past things, but during your
initial testimony, Ms. Rarick, you talked about people being threat-
ened who are whistleblowers. Do you know who those people were?
60
Were they like people who made money off of this, political
operatives? You know, could you elaborate on that a little?
Ms. RARICK. Yes, thank you. So, the people that were doing the
threatening were the supervisors and directors within the state
agencies.
Mr. GROTHMAN. So, state employees were threatening—phys-
ically threatening whistleblowers.
Ms. RARICK. They were saying things like, what happens if you
lose your home, right? Because if you lose your job, you lose your
home. They had pictures in their personnel files of their own homes
and their cars. They asked where their children went to school, and
where their bus stop was, so there was direct threats and indirect
threats.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. Were any of these people brought to jus-
tice or this is just the way they deal with things in Minnesota?
Ms. RARICK. You know, it is an interesting thing within the Walz
Administration. Those people were promoted.
Mr. GROTHMAN. He just defines evil, doesn’t he? Almost the Vice
President of the United States. There is a good book out there
called the Tragedy of American Compassion, and in it, they went
over the history of welfare and whether it should be done by the
state or done privately, and they pointed out the danger that cer-
tain nefarious politicians would always want more welfare because
they were buying votes. Do you, either one of you, on the political
realm of things feel that perhaps a motive for all the crookedness
is, given the size of government today, the importance to win elec-
tions? Were they motivated a little bit by getting votes of groups
of people? Because this is a danger to our—we are not a democracy,
of course, but it is a danger to our form of government.
Ms. RARICK. So, I will answer really quickly, and then I will pass
it over to Representative Hudson. Just really quickly, the caveat to
this, which is so bizarre in Minnesota, is the fact that state employ-
ees, by and large, are Democrats and they vote Democrat. And the
Walz Administration, including Flanagan and his former chief of
staff, Schmitter, were so brutal that these former Democrat em-
ployees want nothing to do with the Democrat party anymore in
Minnesota because they have been treated so horrifically.
Mr. HUDSON. What is so sinister about this is that you are right,
that it absolutely is for electoral benefit and political benefit, but
it is sold to one half of the population, and to the independents and
to the conservatives as we are giving people a hand up, we are
going to help people who are in need, we are going to give them
a temporary way back into working life, but they have set up an
industry that was perpetual where people just stay where they are
at.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Right. So, there is really an electoral incentive
to make sure people do not get out of poverty. I will give you an-
other question. I used to be in the state legislature myself in Wis-
consin, and I know that when you put together your budget, you
have Fed funds, unlike money that, you know, Wisconsin was get-
ting in through our own income or sales tax.
Insofar as the legislature’s claim with Fed funds, you are not ex-
actly as maybe careful with every dollar that is flowing through,
and I am trying to think what we can do to prevent this, because
61
you are always going to have given political parties who think they
can benefit from government largesse, and I think government, by
its nature sometimes, is a little sloppy. Do you think that Min-
nesota government would be a little bit more careful here if, on the
various programs, and it varies from program to program, but if
the state had to pick up 10 or 15 or 20 or 30 percent of program
so that they had skin in the game?
Ms. ROBBINS. Thank you, sir. Yes, in a lot of these programs, the
state does have skin in the game, so many of them, Minnesota
roughly, has a 50/50 Medicaid match, so many of them, it is Fed-
eral tax dollars, but it is also state tax dollars, so we are paying
for it twice for our state tax dollars and then when we pay our Fed-
eral.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Right. I know. I think Wisconsin, when I was
there, was about a 60/40 match with the Feds picking up 60. And
that came into play, but I gather there are some programs on here
that maybe the state matches zero. Is that accurate?
Ms. ROBBINS. I would have to look at each program. I do not
know for sure.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I will ask you just as state legislators and,
you know, different state legislators look at this question dif-
ferently. Do you think, as a country, on some of these programs we
should be asking some of the programs that are 100 percent Fed-
funded now would be better off if they were maybe 70 percent Fed-
funded or 75 percent Fed-funded so the states that have a little bit
more of a skin in the game? I will put it that way.
And, a concern I would have insofar as the programs with the
state is picking up nothing, really the incentive is to have more
graft, because you just bring in Fed funds for the state.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir. So, we need to make sure that states have
skin in the game so that they administer the programs properly,
because otherwise, their incentive is to draw down more Federal
money, more Federal money to take the burden off state taxpayers.
But we are all taxpayers, so somebody is paying. There is no such
thing as a free lunch.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Right. And not just no such thing as a free
lunch. It encourages state legislators to look the other way, because
you just bring in that money into the state. I kind of felt that way
about Medicaid. Thanks.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman’s time is expired. I am sorry,
Glenn, the time is expired on that.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes—who is next? Ms.
Simon.
Ms. SIMON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent
to enter into the record a January 6, 2026, article from The New
York Times, ‘‘Health Department to Freeze $10 Billion in Funding
to Five Democratic States.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. SIMON. Thank you, sir.
I appreciate us having this conversation, and I do apologize to
our witnesses, being in the last briefing took us out of this space,
but you coming here to provide us some opportunity to discuss this
is important. Because I think it is true we have to recognize that
62
fraud is fraud, and theft is theft, and anybody, and I say anyone
who takes away food out of the mouths of children, who denies
childcare to women, particularly young women who are going to
school and working and doing everything right, who need a little
hand up. I do not know who in here has had to walk their baby
to childcare and go to school full-time and work full-time as a
young mom? I know I did. And I know that I received, but 27 years
ago, childcare stipends, so we can be mad at the criminals in every
state, including your state, who took resources from children.
But I also want to go back to the unanimous consent that I just
talked about. I think we do not have to go too far back, maybe two
days, to recognize that the President of the United States and the
Administration is halting billions of dollars now, billions of dollars
to childcare providers and centers around this country. In fact, I
have a story that we just received in my office. We heard today
that there needs to be accountability, but what about account-
ability to a young woman that we talked to today in our office who
was told by her childcare center, and she is going to school full-
time at the local community college, that the President of the
United States will be halting all funding, and within six weeks she
may not have an opportunity to continue her studies, because
guess what? There is a party in power that wants to punish the
poor, not just in Democratic states, but all over the country: the re-
ducing of SNAP benefits, the shocking taking away of resources
from sick children, the halting—the halting—and I will say it
again, the stopping of clinical trials for sick babies.
What we will do, as Democrats, is acknowledge that fraud is
fraud. What we will not do is allow a conversation to go on to
problematize immigrants in this country writ large.
Can you imagine a society where we took the wrong of a small
few and relegated that wrong to a whole community? Well, that is
what we are doing here today, not just in Minnesota, but now ac-
cusing thousands and thousands of childcare providers all over the
country before they get their day in court, proposing that they, in
fact, should not be taking care of kids across the country. I think
it is shocking.
This story that I want to end my quick testimony with: Nancy
Harvey, she is a childcare provider in Oakland, California, where
I represent a beautiful constituency. She is in my congressional dis-
trict. Nancy has been a long-term childcare provider, an advocate
for early care and education for our babies, no matter who their
parents vote for—services that we know that are critical for every
child—every child.
Collective punishment is what the folks across the aisle want to
do. We know it is wrong, it is reckless. And the Trump Administra-
tion, we believe, must immediately reverse course so that families
have access to vital Federal funds that they are entitled to.
Because you have a party that says they want everyone to work
in this country. You want everyone to do their fair share. And yet,
because we are so angry at a small, few folks who in fact broke the
law, that we want to create a collective punishment for all poor
people, working families, who are trying to do their best.
63
I do not have any questions, because they have been answered.
This is a politic of cruelty. This is a politic of anti-family. This is
a politic of anti-poverty.
And for someone who grew up in poverty, I know how it feels
when you wait and wait and wait to just get a chance to do better,
and folks who have never met you, talked to you, believed in you,
or loved you are telling you, you are not worth it. That is what this
Administration is doing to millions of children because of this halt-
ing of funding.
And I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Higgins from Louisiana.
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Robbins and Mr. Hudson, Ms. Rarick, you are all members
of the Minnesota State legislature. Is that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. HIGGINS. And, Ms. Robbins, you are the Chair of the Fraud
Prevention Oversight Committee. Is that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. HIGGINS. And, Mr. Hudson and Ms. Rarick, you are members
of that Committee as well, correct?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir.
Ms. RARICK. That is correct.
Mr. HIGGINS. All right. So, you three, collectively, America
should clearly understand, you have an excellent perspective of
what is going on inside Minnesota and specifically in regards to the
fraud that we are investigating and discussing today. Is that cor-
rect?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. HUDSON. Yes.
Mr. HIGGINS. Okay.
So, we have a particular community, a Somali community, in
Minnesota that has stunning percentages that are participating in
government programs where they are drawing a lot of money, big
money—this has been discussed and revealed and reported and is
factual.
You have a tremendous amount of criminal fraud taking place
that one of my colleagues—the gentleman from the other side of
the aisle mentioned transparency. I would argue that, from a reg-
ular American’s perspective, it is quite transparent that something
criminal is going on when you have billions of dollars disappearing
into childcare centers with no children in them and you have a tre-
mendous transfer of wealth into a relatively small immigrant com-
munity.
You have $9 billion—that is $9,000 million—dollars missing in
the last few years that is alleged to be fraudulently stolen. You
have—they are sending money—the Somali community in Min-
nesota is sending money, big money, overseas. They are contrib-
uting money, big money, to Democrat candidates and elected offi-
cials.
The Democratic political machine in Minnesota has benefited
from this criminal network of Somali immigrants who have system-
atically stolen billions of dollars of Federal charitable money, es-
sentially. The good lady, my colleague, you know, clarified this is
64
money designed for poor folk that need a hand up, and we gen-
erally want that to happen in America in an effective manner.
So, this is the scenario that we are looking into today.
Have I summed it up fairly well, Ms. Robbins?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir. And I would just like to add——
Mr. HIGGINS. Before you add—Mr. Hudson, is this an effective
summary, sir?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir, it is.
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you.
Ms. Rarick?
Ms. RARICK. Yes.
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you.
So, from the perspective of members of the Fraud Investigative
Committee of the Minnesota State legislature, we have a large
criminal network with high percentages of participation in that
criminal network from the Somali community in Minnesota. That
community has tremendous influence within the political arena,
specifically within the Democrat political arena, in Minnesota. The
Democrat political machine has been covering for this criminal net-
work.
And here we go to Governor Walz’s involvement here, which is
shocking to me, quite frankly, because I have been friendly with
Governor Walz for many years. I served with him here.
But can you discuss for me the Governor’s Administration’s in-
volvement in intimidation and oppression and retaliation against
whistleblowers?
Ms. Robbins, have you had conversations with whistleblowers
who have been treated like that by the Walz Administration?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, I have.
Mr. HIGGINS. And can you tell us about that? Without naming
the person or revealing stuff that is secret, tell us how that retalia-
tion would happen.
Ms. ROBBINS. So, it happens in a variety of ways. They are de-
moted or reassigned, or they are told that they could lose their job
and then their house or their pension or their retirement benefits
or not qualify for unemployment. So, it is——
Mr. HIGGINS. Well, that is very serious—that is a very serious al-
legation. I would say that is criminal retaliation.
Mr. Hudson and Ms. Rarick, have you seen similar?
Mr. HUDSON. I would defer to Representative Rarick.
Ms. RARICK. Yes. So, Representative Robbins and, once in a
while, Representative Hudson have had multiple conversations
with whistleblowers, and that is exactly what they said to us, espe-
cially in a face-to-face meeting in Saint Paul. That is exactly what
they said.
Mr. HIGGINS. Unbelievable.
Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, but this leans into the
criminal spectrum, sir. I yield.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Walkinshaw from Virginia.
Mr. MIN. I think I was here first, but——
Chairman COMER. They told me Walkinshaw.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. I am happy to defer.
65
Chairman COMER. I am just doing what the Democrat staff says.
Walkinshaw is next.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just start with something simple I think we are all
agreed upon today: Fraud is real, fraud is wrong, and fraud should
be prosecuted, period. And those who stole taxpayer dollars in Min-
nesota or anywhere else should face the full force of the law.
But what we are seeing today and the premise of this hearing
is selective outrage about fraud. Because if my Republican col-
leagues actually cared about stopping fraud, they would not be de-
fending the one President in modern history who is systematically
tearing down the institutions designed to prevent it, the one Presi-
dent in history who has pardoned fraudster after fraudster after
fraudster.
But Donald Trump did not just pardon those convicted of fraud;
he has gone after the people whose job it is to find fraud. He fired
the independent Inspector General at the State Department. He
fired the independent Inspector General of the Intelligence Com-
munity. He removed the acting Inspector General at Health and
Human Services in the middle of a pandemic as massive emergency
funds were going out the door. He pushed out the Defense Depart-
ment IG.
And why has Trump gone after these independent Inspectors
General? Simple: In each case, they were investigating his or his
Administration’s misconduct and fraud.
Donald Trump’s approach to fraud is to fire the referees and then
say that the game is clean because no one blows the whistle. And
he has not stopped with IGs. He has repeatedly attacked prosecu-
tors, law enforcement, and career public servants who investigated
misconduct that was politically inconvenient for him. He has
turned oversight and fraud prevention into a Donald Trump loyalty
test. That is not draining the swamp.
So, forgive me if I find it difficult to take seriously lectures about
fraud from people who have cheered while the most corrupt Presi-
dent in modern history has dismantled protection after protection
against fraud. You do not get to scream ‘‘Fraud!’’ on Tuesday after
you fired the fraud investigators on Monday.
We can protect taxpayers. We can root out corruption and fraud.
But we cannot do it by turning fraud into a political weapon and
ignoring the record of the person who did more than anyone to
weaken accountability.
Representative Robbins, in Minnesota, the Governor does not
have authority to pardon independently. There is a board, I think,
and the Governor is a member of that board with the Attorney
General and some others. But if that board in Minnesota were to
pardon individuals convicted of fraud, clearly convicted of fraud, do
you think a pardon like that would damage your efforts to root out
corruption and fraud in Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. It would really depend on the specifics of the facts
of the case and the law, and I——
Mr. WALKINSHAW. So, you are not willing to say that?
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. I am not going to comment on a hypo-
thetical.
66
Mr. WALKINSHAW. You are not going to say that pardoning
fraudsters would make it harder to prevent fraud in Minnesota?
You are not willing to say that today?
Ms. ROBBINS. I want to root out fraud and corruption and make
sure——
Mr. WALKINSHAW. Okay.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. People are prosecuted.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. All right. You are not willing to say that. You
are comfortable with fraudsters being pardoned. You do not think
it would damage the work.
Ms. ROBBINS. I want everyone who has committed a crime to be
prosecuted and held accountable.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. And pardoned?
Ms. ROBBINS. It would depend on the case. I do not participate
in the pardon process in Minnesota, but every case is very unique,
and every Governor and Attorney General should look at the spe-
cifics.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. Okay.
Mr. Ballou, can you just talk us through—I know this has come
up already—the firing of independent Inspectors General? The in-
timidation of them, making it harder to do their jobs, how does
that impact fraud prevention and the prosecution of fraud, from the
perspective of a former prosecutor?
Mr. BALLOU. One of the best investments that the government
can make is in its Inspectors General. Last year, IGs identified an
estimated $50 billion in savings either through duplicative pro-
grams or for specifically criminal fraud.
The challenge that we have is, with, you know, 19 IGs being
fired, that work literally is not happening. And there is evidence
to suggest that at least some of them have been fired specifically
because they were going after enemies—or, allies of this Adminis-
tration.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record
a CNN article from February 11, 2025, ‘‘USAID IG Fired Day After
Report Critical of Impacts of Trump Administration’s Dismantling
of the Agency.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. WALKINSHAW. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Burchett from
Tennessee.
Mr. BURCHETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think that it needs to be said that Governor Walz needs to step
down. Him saying he will stay on to investigate is like O.J. Simp-
son saying he will investigate the murder of his ex-wife. It just
does not work out.
I have a question to the representatives.
And thank you all for being here. It is a tough gig. I did that for
many years.
Do you think that the Walz Administration suppressed fraud and
abuse in social service programs because they are afraid of expos-
ing Somali residents?
And just go down the line here.
Yes, ma’am?
67
Ms. ROBBINS. So, not only do we think that is what happened,
Mr. Burchett, but it is also what a Somali-American investigator
associated with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said. He said
in an article, ‘‘Fraudsters have also sought to exploit the bur-
geoning political power of the Somali community and the feckless
fear that establishment politicians and state agencies show when
confronted with charges of racism and Islamophobia.’’ This is from
a Somali Federal prosecutor—or, investigator.
Mr. BURCHETT. Sir?
Mr. HUDSON. Indeed, it is not just a theory. We have the record-
ing of Keith Ellison meeting with defendants in the Feeding Our
Future case, where it was very explicit that the motivation for
keeping scrutiny off them was based on perceived racism.
Mr. BURCHETT. Ma’am?
Ms. RARICK. From the mouth of a whistleblower: ‘‘You appear to
be’’—so this is what a whistleblower was told—‘‘You appear to be
holding back these contracts because they are going to a diverse
community. It is not a good look.’’
Mr. BURCHETT. Okay.
Do you think Somalians tied to these crimes should be deported,
ma’am?
Ms. ROBBINS. If they are not here legally, yes. If they are citi-
zens, they should go through the criminal justice process. And then
there might be other categories, but I would have to better under-
stand——
Mr. BURCHETT. I agree. So, some of these—I mean, some of these
folks are born here and then they are—or are naturalized, so they
would have the constitutional protection thereof. So, yes, ma’am.
Sir?
Mr. HUDSON. If there is any legal pathway to do so, absolutely.
Mr. BURCHETT. Ma’am?
Ms. RARICK. So, you have got quite a big bucket of people, right?
You have got people that were born here. That is a different situa-
tion. You have people that were naturalized.
Mr. BURCHETT. Right.
Ms. RARICK. And then those who are here illegally. So, you have
to treat each one completely separately, with different paths.
Mr. BURCHETT. Ma’am, who is helping these folks navigate this
complex grant application process?
It seems to me that it is orchestrated. They surely have got a go-
to. We have always found that out in my dealings with state gov-
ernment, there was always somebody in there, a gatekeeper.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. My colleague Representative Hudson could
speak to it. There is sort of a cottage industry of Somali consult-
ants who help this.
Mr. BURCHETT. I bet there is.
Yes, sir?
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, as I stated in my opening statement, I have
personally talked to two gentlemen who have worked as consult-
ants for multiple entities receiving government benefits. And they
do not believe they are doing anything wrong. And by the letter of
the law, they might be legally acting, but they have created an in-
dustry out of benefits that were intended to lift people up, not be-
come a business.
68
Mr. BURCHETT. Do you want to add to that, ma’am?
Ms. RARICK. So, that is something that we have heard repeatedly
from whistleblowers and others, that there is, yes, I would call it
a cottage industry of people that, when you land on our soil, that
they are going to teach you all the different ways to sign up for
multiple social service programs.
And there is also that. So, they sign up for the max amount,
which is probably why—there is a report that just came out on De-
cember 13 of last year that says that 81 percent of Somalis were
receiving some sort of welfare in Minnesota.
Mr. BURCHETT. If you do not know the answer to this, just tell
me. Do you have any knowledge or have heard any talk that the
Somalis are directing any of these funds to American U.S. tax dol-
lars to Al Shabaab terrorist organization?
Ms. ROBBINS. There have been past criminal convictions in this.
And, currently, we believe it is mostly happening indirectly, as they
send money to Somalia, that Al Shabaab takes a cut.
Mr. BURCHETT. Do you all agree with that? You good with that?
Do you think the design of the social service programs
incentivizes fraud and abuse?
Mr. HUDSON. Absolutely. There is no doubt about it. When you
are willing to hand over a sack of money to somebody on the as-
sumption that they are going to provide a benevolent service and
then you never check to see if they actually did, obviously you are
going to invite fraud, waste, and abuse.
Mr. BURCHETT. Ma’am?
Ms. RARICK. Yes, absolutely. We just stood up a new program
that we will probably talk about in a little bit, which is the paid
family leave program. It was literally designed by Democrats to
have waste, fraud, and abuse on a grand scale.
Mr. BURCHETT. Okay.
I am going to be out of time. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
But I think America—we are sick of the hearings, we are sick of
all this. We need justice. We need convictions that these folks are
guilty. And that needs to happen. America is sick of this, and it
needs to happen.
Thank y’all so much, and thank you for your bravery.
Chairman COMER. Very well said.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Subramanyam.
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am so glad that Committee Republicans finally want to talk
about fraud and corruption and misuse of Federal funds. This Ma-
jority, though, has conveniently avoided this topic, but let us talk
about the fraud in this Administration.
And let us start with President Trump accepting a $400 million
plane as a gift from Qatar, which the President announced he
would transfer afterwards to his Presidential library—basically to
himself. And then the President announced a trillion-dollar eco-
nomic agreement with a Qatar and a security guarantee for them
as well, an unprecedented one.
Next, Trump has also accepted hundreds of millions of dollars in
undisclosed amounts for his ballroom project, including from com-
panies who had civil and potentially criminal charges that were
then dropped against them by this Administration.
69
And it is not just President Trump. Secretary Kristi Noem has
paid more than $200 million in DHS ad contracts last fall and by-
passed the normal competitive bidding process to award some of
the funds to a firm with deep ties to herself. And then Secretary
Noem also spent $170 million of taxpayer dollars on new jets, in-
cluding one for her own private travel.
Family members of the President have entered into $2 billion in
business deals with the UAE Government and their government of-
ficials, while the United States conveniently then signed a major
chips agreement with the UAE.
And then after his election, President Trump put $4 billion and
shares of his media company in a trust to be run by his son. And
then President Trump maintained ownership of his business em-
pire while letting his family run the day-to-day.
And then in September, Forbes estimated that President
Trump’s memecoin tokens were worth $709 million and his World
Liberty Financial tokens were worth more than $338 million, but
we do not know exactly how that happened.
Then President Trump also stopped the enforcement of foreign—
and bribery and fraud so that we could have American companies
commit fraud abroad, as well, and not get prosecuted.
President Trump also has made hundreds of visits to his own
properties using taxpayer dollars, a lot of golfing included, and
used his Presidency for personal profit to those properties. In 2019,
the GAO reported a trip to Mar-a-Lago cost over $3 million. And
so, if you add that up, that is a lot of taxpayer money being mis-
used and a lot of fraud.
The interim U.S. attorney for D.C. ended prosecution of a Janu-
ary 6 defendant after he represented that defendant in private
practice.
President Trump pardoned fraudster Trevor Milton, a former
CEO convicted of fraud in 2022 who, with the stroke of Trump’s
pen, escaped paying the $600 million in restitution that prosecutors
argued he should pay to people who have invested in his company.
According to The Washington Post, at least 20 people who re-
ceived clemency from Trump were given forgiveness for financial
penalties, totaling tens of millions of dollars.
And then President Trump pardoned Binance founder
Changpeng Zhao, a money launderer, after getting support for a
family crypto venture.
And then President Trump also pardoned CEO Andrew
Wiederhorn for stealing $47 million of his own money from his own
company, but had his case dropped after he donated to the Presi-
dent.
And then President Trump also pardoned the founder of the elec-
tric vehicle company Nikola, who was convicted of fraud and do-
nated $1.8 million to a political committee supporting President
Trump.
And prior to his confirmation, Secretary Hegseth’s wife owned
thousands of dollars in defense stocks, including companies that
contract with the DOD. And DOD Secretary Hegseth brought his
wife, who has defense company investments, to meetings with for-
eign defense officials at a NATO gathering where Ukraine policy
was discussed.
70
And from recently passed funding legislation, U.S. Senators can
claim over $500,000 in taxpayer dollars over phone-record collec-
tions during the January 6 investigation. We just commemorated
the fifth anniversary of January 6.
And then border czar Tom Homan dodged FBI background
checks and accepted $50,000 from undercover agents acting as
businesspeople in exchange for government contracts. The DOJ in-
vestigation of that was shut down by this Administration.
President Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth So-
cial, ‘‘This is a great time to buy—DJT,’’ less than four hours before
lifting the tariffs he imposed days earlier, raising accusations of
improprieties. I would say the accusations are probably well-found-
ed.
President Trump’s FBI Director has reportedly used taxpayer
dollars to escort his girlfriend’s friend home from partying in Nash-
ville.
RFK Jr., the Secretary, refused to fully cut ties to a vaccine law-
suit against a pharmaceutical company while serving as Secretary,
arranging an arrangement that profits from the suit would go to
his son.
Saudi-funded golf tournaments moved events to Trump golf
courses, providing a financial windfall for President Trump and his
family as his Administration sets Middle East policy.
FBI Director Kash Patel refused to divest from stock holdings in
a company that controls a Chinese fast-fashion firm accused of
using forced labor and child labor, raising questions about the ex-
tent to which he would enforce human-trafficking laws.
President Trump’s ‘‘God Bless America Bible,’’ which has a $3
production cost and $60 tag per copy, are printed in China. The
Bible, however, is exempted from Trump’s tariffs on China due to
an exemption for religious materials.
And I could keep going.
Tom Krause, the CEO of Cloud Software, was hired to work on
a payments system at the Treasury Department, raising questions
about competitive advantages for future contracts. A Cloud Soft-
ware subsidiary previously donated a million dollars to Trump’s in-
augural fund.
And the first directive issued by the U.S. Department of Energy’s
Secretary, Chris Wright, focused on advancing geothermal energy,
which benefits Fervo, in which his former company, Liberty En-
ergy, had invested $10 million in.
Commerce Secretary Lutnick——
Chairman COMER. The gentleman’s time is expired. You are at
40 seconds over, and I have been cutting Members off.
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. I have more.
Chairman COMER. You have what?
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. I have more, but I will yield back.
Chairman COMER. Okay.
The Chair recognizes—and you can submit anything you want to
the record. We will put it in there.
The Chair recognizes——
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman COMER [continuing]. Ms. Boebert from Colorado.
Ms. BOEBERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
71
And thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
Representative Robbins, did your fraud prevention committee
raise formal concerns about suspected childcare fraud to DHS or
state leadership before Federal indictments were issued?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, the original Federal indictments came before I
was elected, back in 2015 or so. And then we thought DHS had
cleaned it up, and they did not. So, we did a hearing last February
2025, and we provided them a list of childcare facilities we thought
they should check out. My understanding is they have not.
And so, we are hoping that they will take this seriously and go
investigate, with onsite visits, what is going on in these childcare
facilities.
Ms. BOEBERT. And when you raised awareness, were the Gov-
ernor, Governor Tim Walz, and the Attorney General made aware
of these warnings?
Ms. ROBBINS. Oh, I am sure.
Ms. BOEBERT. Did the state leadership fail to act promptly? I
mean, it kind of sounds like they did, if you still have not received
any information regarding these warnings.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. We do not know that they took any action
with the list we gave them.
Ms. BOEBERT. And, Representative Robbins, what recommenda-
tions from your committee were given and ignored?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, in general, we always try to look at internal
controls. And we have asked—I mean, it is not complicated. We
want them to go make sure recipients are eligible, that providers
are eligible, that services are actually being provided.
Our staff has gone to many of these places, and, so, it is not just
the Nick Shirley video; our staff has gone and looked at this. And
there are literally no one there during business hours. Some of the
offices where we have the address are empty. Like, there is no fur-
niture.
So, they are not doing their job.
Ms. BOEBERT. Thank you.
Mr. Ballou, does the Department of Justice have more resources
to uncover fraud than a 20-year-old YouTuber?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes, but those resources are declining.
Ms. BOEBERT. Are they still more than a 20-year-old YouTuber
with a cell phone camera?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes, as I mentioned earlier, the primary office that
would be responsible for prosecuting public corruption, which is
what is being alleged today, has essentially been decimated. Most
of the attorneys——
Ms. BOEBERT. Okay.
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Have been fired or left.
Ms. BOEBERT. But was it decimated when you were there? Was
there funding there then?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes, so I——
Ms. BOEBERT. It was there then. So, why did the Department of
Justice, under the Biden Administration, ignore repeated attempts
to uncover this massive, fraudulent misuse of taxpayer dollars?
Mr. BALLOU. As you may recall, the indictment actually hap-
pened during the Biden Administration.
72
Ms. BOEBERT. And what action has been taken in the state to en-
sure that this is not happening? Because we just saw dozens and
dozens of centers that are receiving hundreds of millions of dollars,
collectively, that are not functionally operational.
Mr. BALLOU. Yes, well, in 2022, under the Biden Administration,
over 70 people were indicted for exactly this scheme.
Ms. BOEBERT. So, Mr. Ballou, yes or no: A Medicaid program
with low barriers to entry and minimal reimbursement require-
ments, that is something that would be highly vulnerable to fraud
if oversight is weak, correct?
Mr. BALLOU. Exactly. And——
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. The challenge is that that over-
sight——
Ms. BOEBERT. Thank you. Yes or no.
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Is being cut further because of the
slashes.
Ms. BOEBERT. Thank you for your answer.
Mr. Ballou, yes or no: When a program projected at $2.6 million
explodes to over $100 million annually, that is a glaring red flag.
Mr. BALLOU. The problem that we have is that all the oversight
at the Federal level for this is being cut.
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no, is that a red flag, when a $2.6 million
program——
Mr. BALLOU. The challenge that we have——
Ms. BOEBERT [continuing]. Explodes to over $100 million? Yes or
no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Is the offices that are——
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no, sir?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Responsible for identifying those red
flags are being defunded.
Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Ballou, yes or no: When the same individuals
or networks bill multiple Medicaid programs, that indicates orga-
nized fraud.
Mr. BALLOU. And the challenge that we have is that——
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no, does that indicate fraud, when you are
getting the same individuals and networks that are billing multiple
Medicaid programs?
Mr. BALLOU. Precisely the offices that would identify that are
being defunded.
Ms. BOEBERT. As they should be.
Mr. Ballou, yes or no: Did the Biden Administration cover this
up for political reasons because uncovering fraud on this massive
scale would have hurt the 2024 Democrat Vice Presidential can-
didate?
Mr. BALLOU. Just so I understand, are you saying that the offices
that uncover fraud should be defunded?
Ms. BOEBERT. I am saying that these programs and the fraud
that is taking place should be defunded.
Mr. BALLOU. My understanding is what you were just saying is
that the fraud programs need to be defunded.
Ms. BOEBERT. So, no, we need to uncover these, but——
Mr. BALLOU. And the challenge that we have is that those——
73
Ms. BOEBERT [continuing]. These actual programs that are bal-
looning to $100 million—and if you could get back to the question
I just asked. Was this covered up because you thought it would
hurt the 2024 Democrat Vice Presidential candidate?——
Mr. BALLOU. The office that would investigate——
Ms. BOEBERT [continuing]. Governor Tim Walz? Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. That kind of alleged public——
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Integrity fraud——
Ms. BOEBERT. Yes or no?
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Has been defunded.
Ms. BOEBERT. In 2024, it was not defunded. And was this cov-
ered up to protect a Vice Presidential candidate, yes or no, Mr.
Ballou?
Mr. BALLOU. Prior to 2024, over 70 indictments were brought
under the Biden Administration.
Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Ballou, was this covered up to protect a polit-
ical candidate?
Mr. BALLOU. Once again, that office has been defunded. And
there were——
Ms. BOEBERT. Thank you, Mr. Ballou. I am sorry that you are
not——
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. Over 70 indictments brought under the
Biden Administration.
Ms. BOEBERT [continuing]. Answering questions before this Com-
mittee correctly.
Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Tlaib from Michigan.
Ms. TLAIB. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all so much for being here.
I think, as someone who has served in a statehouse, I know how
important it is, no matter if there is a ‘‘D’’ or ‘‘R’’ next to, you know,
any name of anybody that is in charge, to make sure we root out
any sort of fraud, scams, because we know it hurts everyone.
But as a Muslim American, I have got to ask you all, as a public
servant, because—you know, Representatives Robbins, Hudson,
Rarick, like, do you believe every Somali in Minnesota is engaged
in fraud right now, yes or no?
You can start.
Ms. ROBBINS. No.
Mr. HUDSON. No.
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely not.
Ms. TLAIB. Do you believe that Muslims are demons?
Ms. ROBBINS. No.
Mr. HUDSON. No.
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely not. That is a ridiculous thing to even
say. I hope nobody says that.
Ms. TLAIB. Yes.
Well, I just think it is really important, as you all do the job that
you need to do, to also root out hate and divisive language that put,
you know—you can imagine a child listening to that. You know
what I mean? And they are seeing that. And I am telling you, as
somebody that grew up Muslim in America, sometimes you are just
74
listening to that and you feel other’ed, you feel like you are less
than, that maybe the things that are being said are true.
And so, you know, Mr. Chair, I have to submit for the record—
this is, I know this is not your only source, I heard you, but, you
know, ‘‘Unnamed Source in Viral Minnesota Somali Fraud Video is
Right-Wing Lobbyist Who Called Muslims ‘Demons’.’’
But why this is more disturbing—and I do not know if any of you
shared it—but I want you to know who shared it despite this and
all the falsehoods that my colleagues have already highlighted in
a very, very shameful way, that this video has been shared widely
and proudly by Attorney General Pam Bondi, by FBI Director Kash
Patel, by Vice President JD Vance, who actually called the video,
quote, ‘‘far more useful journalism than any of the winners of the
2024 Pulitzer Prizes.’’
The video creator, Nick Shirley, has built this career, right, on
a lot of Islamophobia and dehumanization that I just feel, as public
servants, as you root out fraud—and you have to—that you do not
make it out that it is about the Somali community. It is about
maybe not having the checks and balances and maybe, again,
wanting to do that.
But I urge you all, because this is the same person that also
talked about a community I represent in the city of Dearborn. And,
again, there are children watching. And I say this: that racist rhet-
oric, no matter faith or ethnicity, against any of our neighbors is
not going to prevent fraud. Doing this will not prevent fraud.
We already saw, like, Trump Administration using this story to
pretext sending 2,000 Federal agents to target and harass the So-
mali-American community. I mean, do you agree with that, sending
troops in?
Ms. ROBBINS. I do not think ICE agents are troops. And ICE
agents should be able to do their job anywhere in America.
Ms. TLAIB. I am so sorry. I meant Federal agents. You are right.
I meant Federal agents, ma’am.
Do you believe Federal agents should come in and—2,000 Fed-
eral agents should come into your state?
Ms. ROBBINS. I think ICE agents should be doing their job any-
where in America. It is their jurisdiction, and if there are crimi-
nals——
Ms. TLAIB. But that is not the response of the President. So, if
you——
Ms. ROBBINS. If there are criminals who need to be deported——
Ms. TLAIB. I understand.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. They should be deported.
Ms. TLAIB. But that is not what is going to happen.
Representative Hudson?
Mr. HUDSON. I absolutely welcome immigration enforcement in
the State of Minnesota.
Ms. TLAIB. Yes, but do you think it is really immigration enforce-
ment? Because they are racially profiling. They are going to just
stop people that look Somali or look Muslim or ethnic and just har-
ass them.
And I am telling you as somebody that, for the first time ever,
my mother, in 50 years being here—and the sweetest woman. She
would feed anybody. She does not care if you are a Republican,
75
Democrat, she would make sure you are not hungry and fed. And
she is carrying a passport for the first time in her life here because
she knows because she wears a hijab she might be stopped by ICE
agents.
Is that the kind of militarization—I know you will not get
stopped. But somebody like my mother and somebody like your So-
mali-American neighbors in Minnesota will be stopped in a way
that is dehumanizing. They do it in front of kids. They do not care.
And I am saying this to you and asking all of you: do your job,
but do not allow your job and what you are doing to be utilized as
a racist trope, that all Somali-Americans are criminals, that Mus-
lims are demons. It is incredibly dangerous.
And so, you know, Representatives Robbins, Hudson, Rarick, you
know, one of the things that—the collective punishment, right? I
mean, the fact that now I am seeing the Trump Administration
say, ‘‘Okay, we are going to cut childcare and social services to
California, Illinois, New York, Minnesota, Colorado.’’ Like, is that
really the answer? Is that going to prevent fraud? Do you believe
cutting 23,000 kids from childcare—do you think that is going to
prevent fraud?
Ms. ROBBINS. To my understanding, it is not being cut. If they
can document that the actual children are there and that they have
attendance records, they will get the funding. So, this is a mis-
nomer——
Ms. TLAIB. All right.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Saying it is all going to be cut.
Ms. TLAIB. Okay.
Ms. ROBBINS. It is not true.
Ms. TLAIB. We will see.
Representative Hudson?
Mr. HUDSON. I tend not to blame firemen for water damage when
they put out a fire.
Ms. TLAIB. Okay.
Mr. HUDSON. And that is what is going on.
Ms. TLAIB. So, you are good with them cut—okay.
How about you?
Ms. RARICK. I believe in the due process of law. And so, back to
your comment about your dear mother——
Ms. TLAIB. Yes.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. Because she wears a hijab and she has
to carry her passport. So, I think that every person has value. Ev-
eryone is a child of God, right? And we may have a different name,
but here is the thing, is that they all deserve respect.
Ms. TLAIB. Absolutely.
Ms. RARICK. They all deserve kindness, they all deserve the proc-
ess of law——
Ms. TLAIB. Absolutely.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. And due process. And so——
Ms. TLAIB. And I will tell you——
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. That is what we believe in.
Ms. TLAIB. And I see it among my community. It is a very di-
verse community. We are calling people on other, you know, folks
that are—no matter what their background is—because we do not
want any criminal activity or fraud, because we know it hurts ev-
76
erybody. But I am asking all of you, as you do this, your job, call
out against the racist comments. Protect everyone in Minnesota, no
matter their faith or ethnicity.
Chairman COMER. The gentle——
Ms. TLAIB. So, be careful in sharing these—I am sorry, Chair-
man. This is important.
Be careful, as you do your job, not to allow people that you all
are trying to root out fraud to be used as a ploy to go after Muslims
and Somali-Americans.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady’s time has expired. Thank you.
Before I recognize Mr. Cloud, Mr. Gill has a unanimous consent
request.
Mr. GILL. Sure. Yup. This is from the Minnesota Reformer. ‘‘A So-
mali-American Former Investigator: Why You are Hearing About
Fraud in My Community.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair now—do you have another one?
Mr. GILL. No, Mr. Chairman, just one.
Chairman COMER. Okay.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Cloud from Texas for 5 minutes.
Mr. CLOUD. Thank you, Chairman.
And I appreciate you holding this hearing. It is important, as you
have mentioned at the outset, that we continue our work to un-
cover waste, fraud, and abuse, and, especially in holding this hear-
ing, kind of bring some light to this issue that the media—really,
they were scooped. And so—in the sense that they are having to
cover this issue when really they should have been the ones to in-
vestigate and reveal this is telling.
No doubt there is fraud everywhere. When you are spending tril-
lions of dollars, there are going to be pockets of fraud. But one of
the things that has been revealing this year as we worked through
the DOGE process is uncovering the extent of the fraud, how it has
been systemized, weaponized, and how it is—we have really un-
veiled that it is the world’s, history’s, largest money-laundering
scheme.
Much of this should be a bipartisan issue to go after the waste,
fraud, and abuse, but what we found out is, much of the taxpayer
funding is going to uphold leftist organizations and their campaign
practices and the like.
What is particularly telling about this issue in Minnesota is not
the fact that there is waste, fraud, and abuse. No doubt that is
happening in a number of states, and we need to continue the work
to clean it up. But the way that this has been systemized, institu-
tionalized, and the corrupt and corrosive nature and even criminal
coercion that went on from the Governor’s office and his Adminis-
tration is particularly troubling.
I think it is notable that the Biden Administration was aware of
this even as they tried to sell the Harris-Walz Administration on
the American people. And perhaps that is, you know, why we did
not see this come to light as we should.
But, Representative Hudson, I appreciated something you said in
your testimony, in the sense that these—you said how the struc-
ture of these programs creates incentives that reliably produce the
77
waste, fraud, and abuse across multiple service areas regardless of
the program or intent.
And this is kind of what we see oftentimes, that, you know, for
good intentions maybe, Congress upstands these programs. Over
the decades, what we have seen is they have expanded to where
many of them almost end up being a system of waste, fraud, and
abuse with a veneer of care and concern for people. And our job in
Congress is to help bring the tools to make sure that that does not
happen.
And so, the Ranking Member said, you know, where fraud ex-
isted, we should look into it and we should hold people accountable.
What we see coming from the left a lot of times is, they are fine
with the reactionary—‘‘We are fine in bringing prosecutions after
the fact because the money’s already gone out. We are fine with
prosecuting people who do ballot harvesting once the ballots are in
the pot and we cannot separate them.’’ But it is far better for us
to prevent it.
I would like to talk to—I will start with you, Mr. Hudson, but
if y’all want to jump in—what controls states should be putting in,
but really it comes down to us in saying, whatever Federal dollars
you are receiving, you should be getting these controls in place.
So, could you speak to the institutionalization of this fraud and
the schemes that are in place and maybe list some examples and
then speak to some of the controls that you would recommend that
we take on legislatively to make sure states are doing their job?
Mr. HUDSON. It is a very big question, and I will try to be con-
cise.
So, I have not put a whole lot of thought into what Congress
should do, given my state legislative role, but I can tell you that
states are primarily responsible for the administration of these pro-
grams—for setting up rules, for engaging in verification and com-
pliance. And so, what I imagine Congress can do is provide either
incentive or some form of, for lack of a better term, punishment to
states who fail to do that properly.
Mr. CLOUD. Currently, states are actually incentivized, in a
sense, to game the system against the American taxpayer.
Mr. HUDSON. A hundred percent.
Mr. CLOUD. Yes.
Mr. HUDSON. Absolutely.
And so, the program in—the programs in Minnesota need to be
redesigned from top to bottom. I mean, there needs to be, like, a
demolition and a rebuild.
Because the way they are currently structured, I think most
Americans, when they think about benefit programs, they think
about, like, their neighbor and how they would help out their
neighbor. But that is not how these programs work. It is not rela-
tional. It does not come with expectations or gratitude or an incen-
tive to make your life better. It is set up to create a perpetual in-
dustry out of taking money from taxpayers.
Mr. CLOUD. Yes, that is, that is troubling.
Would you like to speak to that?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I think one of the most practical things you
can do is to require documentation from the recipient and from the
provider.
78
In Minnesota, most of these providers are set up—and the recipi-
ents—based on attestation, and nobody then goes and checks, are
they really eligible? Are the services actually being provided? We
had the Housing Stabilization Program, they estimate 90 percent
of it was fraud. Nobody checked if services were actually being pro-
vided.
And I think you could also require repayment to the feds if there
is fraud. And that would make states pay attention to administra-
tion, if they had to repay the money if it was not spent on the prop-
er services.
Mr. CLOUD. Thank you. Those are a few good tips. We will hope-
fully stay in communication.
My time is up.
Chairman COMER. The Chair——
Mr. CLOUD. I know we opened up a can of worms there that
could take another hour or two, but thank you, Chairman. I yield
back.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Min.
Mr. MIN. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate today’s hearing.
And I am deeply concerned about the allegations of fraud that we
are learning about around the disbursement of social services fund-
ing in Minnesota. This is fraud of the worst kind. It is literally tak-
ing food out of the mouths of hungry kids so that people can enrich
themselves.
And just for your clarification, I have spent—actually, spent my
career fighting fraud. My first job out of law school was at the
SEC. This was in the aftermath of another major set of frauds, the
Enron and WorldCom accounting scandals, which, of course, were
in the private sector, not the public sector.
In Congress, this has been my, just over a year at this point, but
I was happy to sponsor H.R. 1156, a Republican-led bill that came
before this Committee last year. And I think that we need aggres-
sive enforcement and accountability when it comes to taxpayer dol-
lars and their disbursement.
That being said, I have concerns about this hearing as well as
recent actions taken by the Trump Administration. And it is hard
for me not to look at this hearing and the context in which it is
taking place and not see this as a partisan and racist hearing, and
for the reasons mentioned by my colleague.
But we have not had other hearings when it comes to fraud that
takes place in Republican-led states. We have not had hearings in
this Committee, as far as I am aware, and on another committee
this year, as long as I have been in Congress, that go after those
who are not Somali-American.
And so, I hope you all can appreciate that by holding this hear-
ing in isolation of any other hearings around oversight or fraud,
that it looks like we are going after one community in one state
when we know it is rampant.
So, I guess, my first question to y’all—and you all can raise your
hand, or if you do not want to raise your hand, feel free to not raise
your hand, but—do you believe that fraud only takes place in
Democratic-led states?
Ms. ROBBINS. No.
79
Mr. HUDSON. No.
Mr. MIN. And do you believe that fraud only takes place in So-
mali communities?
Mr. HUDSON. No.
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely not.
Ms. ROBBINS. No.
Mr. MIN. And would it surprise you to know that the Congress
has not done hearings on either frauds that have taken place in
Republican-led states or on frauds that have taken place in non-
Somalian communities——
Ms. RARICK. So——
Mr. MIN [continuing]. This year, since I have taken Congress,
this Oversight Committee in particular, in this session?
Ms. RARICK. The Minnesota legislature, we are literally drowning
in fraud.
Mr. MIN. That was a yes/no question, so I am going to reclaim
my time, so thank you very much.
Ms. RARICK. And, so, we spend all of our time doing that.
Mr. MIN. And so, I would just say that if this was a serious hear-
ing, if this was a more serious attempt at oversight, we would be
looking across the board.
And this is also hard to not take in the context of President
Trump’s announcement, I think just yesterday, that he would be—
illegally, I would add—withholding funds for childcare and other
purposes from states led by Democratic Governors, including not
only Minnesota but my home state of California as well as several
others.
Kids are going to go hungry in my district, when we have not
seen evidence of any type of fraud on the scale we are talking
about in California, in Colorado, in Illinois. And yet Donald Trump
is withholding funds from those states. And so, it looks like a very
partisan effort here to go after blue states. Ten billion dollars is
being withheld—$10 billion. And we already have struggling people
right now trying to pay the bills because of rising healthcare costs,
inflation, et cetera. It is cruel and vindictive.
It is also, I think, another example of the ways in which Presi-
dent Trump and this Committee and this Republican-led Congress
look increasingly like they are weaponizing the government to go
after Democrats and people they perceive as their political critics,
rather than going out and trying to address fraud in all ways,
shapes, and forms.
We know, for example, that there have been massive frauds that
have been uncovered in places like Florida, Texas, Louisiana, and
Mississippi. And I want to highlight Mississippi because Mis-
sissippi has made a lot of news recently because they have had the
largest public corruption scandal in their history. And yet, this
Committee has not addressed that once. We have not done a hear-
ing on it. There have been no letters or inquiries, as far as I under-
stand, this year in my time in Congress. So, this is quite problem-
atic. It includes celebrities like Brett Favre, we all know about.
And so, it is very problematic to me that we are not actually doing
this.
Now, Mr. Ballou, you mentioned earlier that, you know, it is
hard to uncover fraud or know about fraud or learn the motivations
80
when we are getting rid of Inspectors General. I think that was
your implication.
And I just want to lean into that just a little bit, because I think
what the Republicans have done in your state actually makes a lot
of sense to me—receiving tips from the public, investigating those
tips, and then trying to provide transparency around your findings.
And yet that is, Mr. Ballou, that is what Inspectors General do,
right?
Mr. BALLOU. That is precisely their job.
Mr. MIN. And would it surprise you to know that this Com-
mittee, which is tasked with overseeing the Federal Government,
has done zero hearings since Donald Trump fired all the Inspectors
General at the beginning of his term?
Mr. BALLOU. That is unfortunate.
Mr. MIN. We really cannot have a discussion around fraud, mis-
use of taxpayer dollars, or waste, if we are not talking about the
fact that we just got rid of all the people that are supposed to over-
see that.
So, I have one last question here and——
Chairman COMER. Your time is expired.
Mr. MIN. Okay.
Chairman COMER. You have gone over a minute. But you——
Mr. MIN. No, I did not go over a minute. I went seven seconds
over.
[Crosstalk.]
Chairman COMER [continuing]. Criticize firing the Inspectors
General when you admit there is massive fraud in Republican
states too. The IGs have failed.
Mr. MIN. Can I ask you——
Chairman COMER. Why should we keep funding these agencies
when there is evidence that the money has been defrauded?
Mr. MIN. I have a parliamentary inquiry for you, sir.
Chairman COMER. Well, go ahead.
Mr. MIN. Are we allowed to use this Committee’s resources to
only go after fraud or states of one party?
Chairman COMER. No. We can go after fraud in any party.
Mr. MIN. So, are we going to go after—are we going to look into
Mississippi the way that we are looking into Minnesota?
Chairman COMER. If you bring stuff forward, you have whistle-
blowers come forward, we will look after it in any state.
Mr. MIN. You will hold a hearing. Do I have your commitment
on that?
Chairman COMER. Well, it depends on the evidence.
Mr. MIN. There is clear evidence out there.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Burlison from
Missouri.
Mr. MIN. I ask unanimous consent to introduce——
Mr. BURLISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. MIN [continuing]. An article——
Chairman COMER. I have already recognized Mr. Burlison.
Mr. MIN [continuing]. Which is——
Mr. BURLISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.
And, actually, I would like to remind the Committee that this
party, this side of the aisle, has dedicated tremendous resources to
81
rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. In fact, the Chairman set up
a Committee called ‘‘DOGE’’ that the other side of the aisle, you
know, demonized and criticized our efforts, in which we had mul-
tiple hearings to identify waste, fraud, and abuse throughout all of
the government agencies.
And so, I applaud the Chairman and this side for the work that
we have been doing.
But, you know, sadly, Minnesota has become an example because
of the extent of the waste and the fraud. I have to ask. It must be
embarrassing for the citizens of Minnesota, Chairwoman Robbins.
Ms. ROBBINS. So, I am not embarrassed to be from Minnesota,
but I am frustrated and angry about the theft of taxpayer money.
Mr. BURLISON. My—I have family that live in Minnesota. It is a
wonderful state. And I know that they are angry, that they are
very frustrated.
So, I think that—we talk about the amount of money that is
being wasted, $9 billion. That seems like an abstract amount, but
let us break that down. Nine billion dollars stolen from less than
six million citizens of Minnesota, correct?
That is, per individual—imagine, right?—you know, every citizen
of Minnesota, your bank account, suddenly someone took $1,500
out of your bank account. Every taxpayer—there are around three
million citizens—or, taxpayers in Minnesota. Every taxpayer just
had $3,000 stolen from their bank account.
How does that feel to a citizen of Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. Minnesotans are so frustrated because not only
have we had that money stolen from us, but we had an $18-billion
surplus that Tim Walz spent and then raised our taxes $11 billion
and left us with a $6-billion deficit. So, we have had the fiscal mis-
management on top of the fraud, and Minnesotans are completely
fed up.
Mr. BURLISON. You know, in Missouri—there is also an oppor-
tunity cost to all that money. So, in Missouri, we just, you know,
green-lit a project to add more lanes to I–70, which runs from one
end of the state to the other, and it was only—it was less than $3
billion.
You could imagine: People in Minnesota could enjoy adding addi-
tional lanes on Interstate—on three of your interstates—I–35, I–94,
I–90. Don’t you think the people of Minnesota would love to have
wider lanes—or, more lanes added to their highway infrastructure?
Ms. ROBBINS. They absolutely would.
But even if we stayed in the social service realm, there was $104
million in one year that was fraudulent in the Housing Stabiliza-
tion Service. If we could have taken that $104 million and put it
into supportive housing, we would have done a lot to solve the
homelessness problem.
So, every time these dollars are fraudulently stolen, it is a huge
opportunity cost for Minnesotans.
Mr. BURLISON. Absolutely.
And you have been sounding the alarm for quite some time. Why
has it taken until 2025 for these to fully come to light?
Ms. ROBBINS. The Fraud Prevention and State Oversight Com-
mittee was formed in 2025 once we——
Mr. BURLISON. Okay.
82
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Had a tie in the House.
Mr. BURLISON. So, when the Republicans took majority, you fi-
nally—or, you were able to actually root out the waste, fraud, and
abuse in Minnesota, which is why we now know about it.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. We are in a tie, technically, but we were able
to negotiate this as part of the power-sharing agreement.
Mr. BURLISON. I seek unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, to
enter into the record an article from the New York Post, ‘‘Former
Homeland Security Agent Claims Prosecutors Ignored Minnesota
Day Care Fraud Cases: ‘Just Evaporated.’ ’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BURLISON. Thank you.
So, there has been investigations been going on for some time.
I understand you do not report them—or, have really kind of by-
passed the state agencies. You report directly to the Federal Gov-
ernment. Can you elaborate on why that is? It is pretty obvious
why, but.
Ms. ROBBINS. So, when my staff—we have a very small staff. We
have one researcher on our Committee, and then we as members
also do a lot of our own research. And when we get an investigation
that is credible, we do as much research as we can, but, as I said
earlier, we do not have access to bank records, health records, or
the state payments system. And so, based on that, when we get
something that is credible, we turn it over to the Office of Legisla-
tive Auditor and to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
I have been accused of hiding whistleblower data from the de-
partment, but when the department comes to hearings, we provide
documents every time. I have flagged 72 childcare centers. We have
given them lists of all of the housing—multiple addresses where
there are more than five providers, sometimes up to 22 providers,
at the same address. They have done nothing with it.
But what I do not give them is the whistleblower information,
because I am protecting our whistleblowers in Minnesota. They fi-
nally are stepping up, and I have their back.
Mr. BURLISON. Good for you. And I appreciate you for doing that.
And then, finally, with that, I will end. I have more articles to
submit for the record, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Do you want to submit them now, or are you
going to submit them—okay. Proceed.
Mr. BURLISON. Okay. One is an article produced that was about
childcare welfare fraud.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BURLISON. A report produced by the Office of the Legislative
Auditor of Minnesota, ‘‘Child Care Assistance Program: Assessment
of Fraud Allegations.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BURLISON. And then from the Minnesota House Research
Group, ‘‘The Child Care Assistance Program and the Fraud With-
in.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. BURLISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Frost from
Florida.
Mr. FROST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
83
It is very important that we eliminate fraud in our social pro-
grams, and I am glad that Governor Walz has taken real, concrete
steps in Minnesota to combat fraud, like signing legislation that
strengthens the state agencies’ ability to detect, prevent, and pros-
ecute fraud, and establishing a statewide Inspector General Coordi-
nating Council and appointing an independent state auditor to in-
vestigate claims.
Mr. Ballou, how will these actions help uncover and prevent
fraud in the state?
Mr. BALLOU. Well, it is the funding and staffing that is necessary
to uncover fraud that is happening at a state level. But that staff-
ing is not being mirrored at the Federal level.
Mr. FROST. What do you mean by that?
Mr. BALLOU. Well, bluntly, most of the enforcement mechanisms
for going after white-collar crime are being decimated, especially in
the Justice Department but also the Consumer Financial Protec-
tion Bureau and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Mr. FROST. Of course.
As you have pointed out, you know, it is important for Governors
to play a big role in fighting fraud in their state.
I want to give you a hypothetical. Let us say that you have a
state’s Governor that funnels millions of dollars from the state’s
money over to the Governor’s wife’s nonprofit. Let us say then that
nonprofit takes that same money and gives it to political action
committees that help her husband’s causes.
Would that be worth investigating?
Mr. BALLOU. Absolutely.
Mr. FROST. Well, what say the rest of the witnesses? In that hy-
pothetical, is that something we should also investigate?
Ms. RARICK. So, I do not think we are in a place to talk about
hypotheticals, but thank you for the question.
Mr. FROST. The rest of the witnesses, you do not think we should
investigate fraud?
What do you think?
Mr. HUDSON. I think I came here prepared to talk about the
fraud that is taking place in my state——
Mr. FROST. Okay.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. And I want to contain my testimony
to the purpose of the hearing.
Mr. FROST. Representative Robbins?
Ms. ROBBINS. I think we should investigate credible allegations
of fraud wherever they are. But we do not——
Mr. FROST. Thank you. I 100 percent——
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Know the specifics of that——
Mr. FROST [continuing]. Agree with you, Representative.
Ms. ROBBINS [continuing]. Circumstance.
Mr. FROST. And, actually, you know, I want to talk about some-
thing that is really important, because my colleague Dave Min just
brought up something. And, you know, Chair Comer, you had said,
if there are credible allegations, if there is evidence, we should look
into it, and I have something for us to look into.
This is not a hypothetical. This happened in my State of Florida.
Governor Ron DeSantis, Casey DeSantis, and the Hope Florida
Foundation have been subject to a bipartisan investigation and
84
now a criminal investigation for this exact same thing I just talked
about.
So, if we are going to be here going state by state in this Com-
mittee talking about fraud, I am okay with doing that, but let us
make sure it is not just Democratic states, like Dave Min said, and
let us also look at Republican-led states as well.
Because what happened in my State of Florida is, $10 million of
Medicaid money was funneled to the Governor’s wife’s nonprofit.
Then that nonprofit took that money and gave it to political action
committees helping her husband.
I would like to enter for the record a unanimous consent for The
New York Times’ ‘‘Why Did a Charity Tied to Casey DeSantis Sud-
denly Get a $10 Million Boost?’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. FROST. Chair Comer, will you commit to working with me to
schedule a hearing on this?
Chairman COMER. Get the stuff to me, and we will definitely look
at. Ten million dollars. We are talking about $9 billion today.
Mr. FROST. So, does the $10 million——
Chairman COMER. Yes, get that to me. Appreciate it.
Mr. FROST. Yes, I will get it to you. I will get it to you. Definitely
a lower amount of money, but $10 million in Medicaid money going
to—being funneled from taxpayer Floridians to political action com-
mittees is fraud and is criminal. And this is a bipartisan investiga-
tion looked at by both Democrats and Republicans, and I definitely
expect this Committee to do the same thing.
And I have one more thing I want to talk about that Representa-
tive Ansari brought up. President Trump reposted conspiracy theo-
ries on his Truth Social account about the murder of Minnesota
State legislators Mark and Melissa Hortman that suggest that
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz had the Hortmans assassinated.
Governor Walz says this behavior will get more innocent people
killed. And the Hortman children have come out on the President
and called on the President to take the statements down.
I think it is very important that we are very clear that we con-
demn this type of behavior. So, I just want to go down the line and
hear if you agree with the Hortman children that we should con-
demn and we ask the President to take down this post.
Mr. Ballou?
Mr. BALLOU. Yes.
Mr. FROST. Representative?
Ms. RARICK. So, as the longest-serving member on this panel of
Minnesota, I am so offended that anybody would accuse anybody
of the assassination other than Lance Boelter, because this
was——
Mr. FROST. So, do you agree with the——
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. A deep, deep scar in the State of Min-
nesota and——
Mr. FROST. Yes.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. All of us personally. I served with Me-
lissa——
Mr. FROST. I understand.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. Hortman my entire 13 years.
Mr. FROST. Ma’am, but do you agree——
85
Ms. RARICK. And it is just unbelievably beyond the pale——
Mr. FROST. Do you agree that——
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. That we are talking about that right
now.
Mr. FROST [continuing]. We should call on the President to take
down the post? That is it.
Ms. RARICK. I said what I said. I think that it is beyond the pale
that anybody talk about anyone or——
Mr. FROST. Okay. You cannot come to call on the President to
take down the post. So, it is okay. We will move on.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. Anybody assassinating Melissa
Hortman——
Mr. FROST. Representative Hudson?
We will move on. Thank you, ma’am.
Ms. RARICK [continuing]. Except for Lance Boelter.
Mr. FROST. Thank you, ma’am. We will move on. You cannot call
on the President to take down this post. We will move on to Rep-
resentative Hudson.
It is just a yes or no.
Mr. HUDSON. I cannot deceive the Committee by giving it a bi-
nary. I have spoken to this many times. I have renounced the con-
tent of these ridiculous conspiracy theories, and I have called them
‘‘ridiculous’’ on multiple occasions, but——
Mr. FROST. That is great. Do you think it is appropriate for the
President of the United States to repost it?
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. I am not going to engage in this silly
condemnation game——
Mr. FROST. No. No, no, no. This is not——
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. In a context——
Mr. FROST. No, no, no, no, no.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. In a context——
Mr. FROST. This is not silly. This is the President——
Mr. HUDSON. What did you have to say——
Mr. FROST. It is my time. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. About the assassination of Charlie
Kirk?
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON. What did you have to say——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. About Jay Jones——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. Who is the chief law enforcement offi-
cer——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. In the State of Virginia——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. Fantasizing about——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. Shooting Republicans and watching
kids die——
Mr. FROST. I will reclaim my time.
[Crosstalk.]
Mr. FROST. The gentleman will——
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. In their mothers’ arms?
86
Mr. FROST [continuing]. Stop talking on my time.
Mr. HUDSON. I am not playing this game——
Mr. FROST. The gentleman will stop talking——
Chairman COMER. Order.
Mr. HUDSON [continuing]. In that context, ever.
Mr. FROST [continuing]. On my time.
Chairman COMER. Order, order, order.
We will give you a few seconds——
Mr. FROST. A few seconds.
Chairman COMER [continuing]. To close, Mr. Frost.
Mr. FROST. I have to comment on this because this is not silly.
It is not silly to expect good behavior from the people at the highest
levels of our government, including——
Mr. HUDSON. You expect it from Jay Jones?
Mr. FROST. No, not your time.
Mr. HUDSON. Do you expect it from Jay Jones?
Mr. FROST. Not your time. Including the President of the United
States.
Mr. GILL. Order.
Mr. FROST. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Timmons from South Carolina. Is that
right? Yes, Mr. Timmons.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, we are only one week in to 2026,
and the Democrats are having a tough year. Here we are—this
should not be a partisan issue.
We have uncovered $9 billion in fraud. It does not matter if it
is a red state or a blue state. That is $9 billion. And you got to re-
member, the purpose of these social safety nets is to help people
that need help. And when we have that amount of fraud, it under-
mines the purpose of the social safety nets. The people that want
and need the benefits that they are deserving because they are
American citizens, they are unable to get them because people are
stealing money.
And it is even somewhat comical because, just a few days ago
when the Trump Administration executed the most incredible—I
mean, they technically executed—a warrant on Maduro, a narcoter-
rorist. They were able to not have a single casualty from our mili-
tary, they limited collateral damage, and they executed what is
truly just a perfect tactical military operation. And the Democrats
have gone ballistic over it, gone ballistic.
This man has had warrants out for his arrest for five years. He
has had a $25 million bounty, which was increased to a $50 million
bounty. This is not a partisan issue. He has killed hundreds of
thousands of Americans over the last few decades because he has
sent drugs here for Americans to use and they have died from it.
This is not a partisan issue.
Venezuela was a huge step in the right direction. Peace through
strength works. We got to get together and we got to work on the
issues that the American people want us to work on. And seeking
out waste, fraud, and abuse, seeking out $9 billion in theft of social
safety net money is something that should not be partisan. And the
fact that my colleagues across the aisle are going ballistic over
87
these ridiculous ancillary issues and trying to cast shade over what
should not be a partisan issue is just ridiculous.
So, get it together. We need to do the job that the American peo-
ple sent us here to do.
I want to actually point something out. So, Representative Rob-
bins, my understanding is that around $250 million in fraud was
found in the four years of the Biden Administration. There were a
number of indictments, dozens of indictments. Is that number
about right?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I think now they are up to about $310 million
for the Feeding Our Future.
Mr. TIMMONS. All right. Thank you. So, in the last year, in the
last year, we are at $9 billion. Is that the number you got?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. The U.S. Attorney has estimated that the
total fraud in the Medicaid portion, which has nothing to do with
Feeding Our Future—so, it is on top of that $310 million—half of
it is fraud.
Mr. TIMMONS. Thank you.
Mr. Ballou, you see where I am going with this? So, you are say-
ing that we have had—we have decimated the budget of the IGs—
which, by the way, were not doing their jobs because we have un-
covered, I mean, $8.5, $8.6 billion more dollars in fraud with less
resources.
So, how do you explain your testimony earlier that we have deci-
mated the entities that are designed to investigate fraud when we
have uncovered exponentially more fraud with less resources? How
do you explain that?
Mr. BALLOU. You know, what we have been talking about today
is not just regular fraud, the public corruption. So, the challenge
that we have now is that the public corruption office——
Mr. TIMMONS. So, here is the thing. We are not having a hearing
on public corruption. We are having a hearing on $9 billion in
fraud associated with Minnesota social safety nets. And so, you
keep pushing back on that. You keep pushing back on this nar-
rative that we should be seeking out waste, fraud, and abuse every-
where by saying that the Trump Administration has decimated the
entities that are designed to seek out waste, fraud, and abuse, and
yet those same entities have uncovered exponentially more fraud.
Mr. BALLOU. The problem is that they have not charged any pub-
lic officials——
Mr. TIMMONS. There is no problem. Your logic is flawed, and you
know your logic is flawed.
Mr. BALLOU [continuing]. And the public integrity function has
been——
Mr. TIMMONS. Your logic is flawed, and you know your logic is
flawed. I just wanted to point it out. It is okay.
So, I guess I want to get to this. We have a limited amount of
money. We have $37 trillion in debt. We run a $2 trillion annual
deficit. And we have spent much of this year seeking out waste,
fraud, and abuse trying to get our fiscal house back in order be-
cause we are running out of time.
So, this cannot be a partisan issue. We cannot solve these prob-
lems without a bipartisan approach. So, I have a bill that I filed
88
called the TABS Act. And what it does, is it uses technology to con-
firm income eligibility.
So, $1.5 trillion every year go to social safety nets that are means
tested, meaning depending on where you live, if you make too
much money, you do not get them. And so, if we use technology to
real-time verify, you can actually give the social safety net, the per-
son that is seeking it, way faster, in most cases immediately, and
then you can remove them from that social safety net in real time.
In the Big Beautiful Bill, we changed it from once a year to twice
a year, and that saved $10 billion. If you do it in real time, you
are going to save 20 percent of the money. So, if you extrapolate
that over ten years, it is about $2.5 trillion in savings for means-
tested social safety nets.
These are the kind of things we need to be doing. This is not a
partisan issue. We all agree that people fall on hard times and we
need to help them up. We need to help them up.
But if we have $9 billion of fraud in Minnesota, imagine what
we have in California, imagine what we have in New York, imagine
what we have across this country, and we have got to get a handle
on it because we are running out of time. We cannot keep spending
money we do not have.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Palmer from Alabama.
Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Robbins, how long do you think the corrupt activity has been
going on in Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. We have whistleblower reports dating back from
2013 or 2014, so through the Dayton Administration and the Walz
Administration.
Mr. PALMER. Over a decade. Over a decade.
Why is it that we are just now seeing—having this fully uncov-
ered? And I am not sure it is fully uncovered yet. Why is it—I
mean, you have got an Attorney General, you have got a Governor
who claims to be pure as the driven snow. And you get a lot of
snow in Minnesota. Why is it just now coming out?
Ms. ROBBINS. Well, because it has been a failure of the Adminis-
tration, particularly our Office of Management and Budget, who
has responsibility constitutionally for this, and they have not been
doing their job. But because we were able to create this oversight
Committee, it is the first time in the history of our legislature we
have had an oversight Committee.
Mr. PALMER. Would you agree that with this fraud going on over
a decade and, basically, the lackadaisical or disinterested approach
from your government, that that is why it is necessary for the
Oversight Committee here in Congress to take this up? Would you
agree with that?
Ms. ROBBINS. I do. We are grateful for your help, because we do
not have the resources and we do not have subpoena power and
some of the tools that you have.
Mr. PALMER. Well, the reason that—one of the reasons that I do
not think we need to bring Mississippi in here is because they have
been very aggressive in their investigation and prosecution, along
with the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
89
And I just want to point that out, Mr. Chairman, that we would
not be sitting here today asking the questions that we are having
to ask if the Governor of Minnesota, Walz, and the Attorney Gen-
eral, and the other people that are responsible for oversight had
acted expeditiously in investigating this themselves.
So, that is why we are here, isn’t it?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. PALMER. I appreciate all of you being here.
The charges and reports of fraudulent autism centers in Min-
nesota are shocking to me. Could you describe to us your Commit-
tee’s findings in this area, Ms. Robbins, and how these fraudsters
were operating?
Ms. ROBBINS. It is really shocking. So, there were autism centers
that are Medicaid waiver program, and people were getting paid
kickbacks to sign their kids up to participate in the autism center
so they could build Medicaid, and these children did not necessarily
have autism.
We have substantiated, court-documented by the U.S. attorney,
how the parents were getting their kids falsely diagnosed with au-
tism so that then they could get a kickback to participate in billing
Medicaid for autism services.
Mr. PALMER. It is not just the fraud in terms of money. It is the
abuse of children by their parents that has taken place here. And
they were able to defraud the Early Intensive Development and Be-
havioral Intervention (EDIBI) program millions?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I think we are just at the tip of the iceberg
in understanding it. There has been a handful of charges, but we
expect more.
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Hudson, do you think General Ellison or Gov-
ernor Walz was aware of the fraud prior to the exposure that has
been brought now?
Mr. HUDSON. Oh, there is simply no doubt. I mean, again, refer-
ring to the exhibit that I submitted with my testimony, 2,500 pages
of OLA reports citing all of the red flags and risk factors, and they
did not take appropriate action.
Mr. PALMER. Why do you think they did that, Mr. Hudson and
Ms. Rarick? She is about to hit her button, so go ahead.
Mr. HUDSON. In my opinion, the simplest answer, the most log-
ical answer is that they did not want to know the answer to the
question. Because the answer to the question was going to require
them to take action against one of their favorite political constitu-
ents.
Mr. PALMER. It has also been alleged that they may have bene-
fited.
Mr. HUDSON. Yes, that has been alleged. And I hope the evidence
is entered into the record through investigation and prosecution.
Mr. PALMER. Well, it is going to be a thorough investigation.
Ms. Rarick, you were about to say something?
Ms. RARICK. Just really quickly. So, I think it should be noted—
we have not said this yet—but Jim Nobles was our legislative audi-
tor for 38 years, and he did a statement in the Star Tribune on De-
cember 29 of 2025. And he said, literally, all the state needed to
do was implement standard financial controls and oversight.
90
Why the Walz Administration did not do that is still a mystery,
but it is disturbing.
Mr. PALMER. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I think we just heard full jus-
tification for why we are having to have this hearing and why we
will have to followup. Because, clearly, the State of Minnesota had
almost a lack of interest, maybe even an interest in covering it up.
And so, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back, and look forward
to further investigating this massive problem.
Chairman COMER. Thank you, Mr. Palmer. I think the evidence
is clear as well.
The Chair now recognizes Mrs. Luna from Florida.
Mrs. LUNA. Thank you, Chairman Comer.
Before I get to the questioning of some of our witnesses today—
and thank you again for being here—I would like to make a motion
to subpoena journalist Seth Harp for leaking classified information,
including doxxing a Delta Force commander on Operation Absolute
Resolve, which liberated the Venezuelan people and brought a ter-
rorist dictator to the United States to face justice for his crimes
against American citizens.
Chairman COMER. A motion has been made, another motion by
Mrs. Luna. The Committee will hold this motion in abeyance till
the end of today’s hearing.
The Committee will now proceed.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Chair?
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes——
Mrs. LUNA. Thank you, Chairman Comer.
Mr. FROST. I make a motion to request this in writing.
Chairman COMER. Hold on. Hold on. There has been a par-
liamentary inquiry.
Mr. FROST. Parliamentary inquiry. We would like to request this
in writing.
Chairman COMER. Okay.
Mrs. LUNA. I can submit that. If I can just, right after this, I will
totally submit that to you guys. Because I have some other motions
that we are voting on at the end.
This is a great motion in writing.
Mr. FROST. Okay. Thank you.
Mrs. LUNA. We want everyone on record for this one. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. All right. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna.
Mrs. LUNA. Thank you, Chairman Comer.
Honorable Robbins, based on your record before your committee,
when did Governor Walz first become aware of widespread fraud
in Minnesota’s social service programs?
Ms. ROBBINS. I would assume that he has been aware of it since
he ran for office for Governor in 2018.
Mrs. LUNA. By 2017, DHS investigators warned CCAP fraud
could exceed 50 percent. Was that information elevated to the Gov-
ernor’s office?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. There was an OLA report.
Mrs. LUNA. Thank you, ma’am.
By 2020, state officials knew Feeding Our Future invoices were
fraudulent. We know that payments continued to the AG’s knowl-
edge. Did they continue to the Governor’s knowledge as well?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
91
Mrs. LUNA. Attorney General Ellison agreed on tape to fight
Minnesota’s own Department of Human and Health Services in ex-
change for Somali political and financial support.
In your personal opinion, do you believe it is a possibility that
Governor Walz also made that personal deal or that he at least
knew about the Attorney General’s agreement?
Ms. ROBBINS. I do not know.
Mrs. LUNA. Okay. I do not want to rehash what you guys have
spent hours answering. We know that there is a big issue with the
fraud in Minnesota.
So, on a number of things, I would first like to point out thank
you for being here today. But because of your testimony and be-
cause of some of the evidence that we have seen brought forward,
as well as, I am sure, the fact that this Committee, I assume, at
Chairman Comer’s direction, will be soon subpoenaing AG Ellison,
I would like to make criminal referrals regarding Governor Walz
as well as AG Ellison.
As you know, U.S. Code 371 and U.S. Code 2, which deals with
criminalized conspiracies to defraud the United States and estab-
lishes liability for individuals who knowingly aid or abet the com-
mission a Federal offense, includes willingful blindness or delib-
erate inaction where duties to act exist. So, I will be referring them
later on today.
Now, aside from that, I do just want to point out that there is
a statute that you can denaturalize citizens if their applications
were fraudulent and also, too, if within ten years of their natu-
ralization that they committed fraud in the United States.
And so, I take this very seriously, and it is very unfortunate that
these people chose to do this, because being an American citizen is
not a right; it is a privilege, especially if you were not born here.
And so, with that idea in mind, I would like to say that these
criminals took advantage of the very country that gave them ref-
uge. They do not deserve the privilege of remaining here, and,
frankly, they do not deserve to even be imprisoned here, which is
why, as the Chairwoman of the El Salvador Caucus, I work very
strongly with President Bukele. And we also know that CECOT
has proven to be a great facility to house people that are
denaturalized and deemed not worthy of U.S. citizenship, and I will
be making referrals for those individuals if they are found guilty.
Thank you for being here today.
Chairman, I yield my time.
Chairman COMER. Will you yield the last 2 minutes you had?
Mrs. LUNA. Yes, sir, to you.
Chairman COMER. All right. So, we have talked a lot about Gov-
ernor Walz. I think you have all done a tremendous job codifying
the fact that there is massive amounts of waste in Minnesota. This
has been taking place for years, and yet nothing has been done.
The Democrats want to keep spending more money. They are
like, why are we cutting off funding temporarily? We need to spend
more money, throw more money at the problem. That is not work-
ing. The American people are not going to have it.
Thank you all for being here today to talk about this. I know it
takes a lot of courage, and I am sure you are probably getting
threats from certain people that have benefited from this and oth-
92
ers that are misinformed by the, you know, some of the—my col-
leagues on the other side of the aisle.
We have talked about Walz. You have stated that Walz has been
well aware of this, but we have not talked a lot about Attorney
General Ellison. Very quickly, do you all have anything to add
about his knowledge? Was he aware of this?
Go ahead, Ms. Rarick.
Ms. RARICK. Thank you. I actually have that document in front
of me that I wanted to share.
So, this is from a press release that we actually confronted him
with when we had a hearing and he was in front of us. And the
press release is from September 26 of 2022, and this is press re-
lease from his office.
And it says, ‘‘Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and his
office have been deeply involved for two years in holding Feeding
Our Future accountable.’’ Now, the tape that we have been talking
about as well where he said he would go to bat for the fraudsters
against state agencies which, by the way, were his clients, hap-
pened one year prior to this press release.
So, if he had been working to oust the fraudsters for Feeding Our
Future, he would have known who they were at the time of that
meeting. He claimed in front of us that he did not know who they
were. That was his reason to meet with them.
And, by the way, I would say that he did not meet with them
in his official office, which is highly suspect. He met with them at
a strip mall, I think, something like that.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Well, we have invited him to be at our
next hearing on this. If he does not respond very soon, he will be
receiving a subpoena to be here at the next hearing.
And we look forward to working with you and any other whistle-
blowers who want to come forward to ask Mr. Ellison specific ques-
tions.
Now, the Chair recognizes Mr. Gill for a unanimous consent.
Mr. GILL. I have got a unanimous consent request to enter into
the record, ‘‘Former legislative auditor: Is the Walz Administration
Finally Awake about Fraud?’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Mr.—are you ready,
Mr. Langworthy or?
Mr. LANGWORTHY. No. Please go to the next.
Chairman COMER. So, Mr. McGuire. The Chair recognizes Mr.
McGuire from Virginia for 5 minutes.
Mr. MCGUIRE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
witnesses for being here today and for your tireless work on your
committee to investigate and sound the alarm for fraud in your
state.
After receiving a mandate from the American people and taking
office, President Trump and this Administration have worked tire-
lessly to root out and put an end to waste, fraud, and abuse in our
Federal Government.
The recent childcare fraud that has come to light in Minnesota
is just the latest example of why the American people deserve to
have oversight in how their taxpayer dollars are being spent.
93
Talking with constituents in my district, I had one guy say to
me, he said, ‘‘John, why, why should we even pay taxes?’’ The sig-
nal that we are getting around our country is that you do every-
thing right and you pay your taxes, and these folks are buying
homes in foreign countries. These fraudsters are stealing from the
American people, we, the people.
And one constituent said, ‘‘We are not paying taxes, we are pay-
ing criminals.’’ We need to know where our taxpayer dollars are
going.
The 20 million or so illegal aliens that came into our country
have come here to break the donkey’s back. You know, if you want
to break a donkey’s back, you keep loading it on and loading it on
until its back breaks. And we are sick and tired of the waste, fraud,
and abuse.
For some reason, it seems like our friends on the other side of
the aisle partner with the fraudsters and not those people that are
identifying the fraud.
You may remember during the summer of love when they were
burning our cities for 80 days. Instead of supporting the police,
they wanted to defund the police and use their dollars to bail them
out of jail so they continue burning our cities. Makes no sense.
Recently, we got Maduro out of his country to stand trial for kill-
ing and terrorizing thousands of American citizens. And instead of
telling the military what a great job they did, they had protests
around the country for Maduro.
And by the way, I had a friend in the airport in Buenos Aires
when it was announced. The entire airport cheered. And people in
Venezuela say that they have been eating out of trash cans, and
family members got into prostitution because their family was
starving, they are trying to survive.
As a Navy SEAL veteran, I served in Venezuela during the nine-
ties, and it was one of the most prosperous, strongest economic
countries, safest places in South America, and they have ruined it.
So, anyway, the people are sick and tired of the waste, fraud, and
abuse.
In reference to the most recent childcare fraud scandal coming to
light, a spokesperson for Governor Walz said, the Governor has
worked for years to crack down on fraud and asked the state legis-
lature for more authority to take aggression on this action. He has
strengthened oversight.
Ms. Robbins and Mr. Hudson and Ms. Rarick, as members of the
Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee, do you
agree that Governor Walz has strengthened oversight in the State
of Minnesota, yes or no?
Ms. ROBBINS. No. He belatedly took action this fall because of the
enormous pressure that is coming to bear. But his agency has al-
ways had the authority that he trumpeted now.
Mr. HUDSON. No. He simplified the problem by pretending that
you can solve it by appointing somebody to look at it. This needs
systemic reform.
Ms. RARICK. He absolutely shredded oversight, simply.
Mr. MCGUIRE. I heard their testimony that it was career suicide
to speak up.
94
But, Ms. Robbins, you have been very vocal about the mistreat-
ment of whistleblowers by Governor Walz. Can you speak to some
of the ways that Governor Walz and his Administration have re-
taliated against whistleblowers?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I have met with many whistleblowers who
have spoken about how they were told that they would be demoted
or reassigned. I know of people who were reassigned. We also know
that they were surveilled in their place of work when people
thought they might be the, quote, leaker. Their email and their
chat functions were surveilled electronically for words like ‘‘fraud’’
or ‘‘whistleblower’’ or ‘‘compliance’’ or ‘‘overbilling’’.
So, they are under a great deal of stress in the Department of
Human Services, and we are grateful for the whistleblowers who
have spoken out to us.
Mr. MCGUIRE. So, based on all of your knowledge about this
scandal or this fraud in Minnesota, I think it is the tip of the ice-
berg. We are like $37 trillion in debt, and now, I do not know what
it is about Somali, but apparently they are using that for Somali
daycare centers in Washington State now. And it has come to light
that there is some daycare center fraud in Ohio as well associated
with Somalis.
So, I think we are just the tip of the iceberg, and there is waste,
fraud, and abuse everywhere. Maybe a big chunk of our national
debt comes from waste, fraud, and abuse.
So, I do not care if it is a red state or a blue state. We need to
have oversight, and we need to protect the American people’s tax-
payer dollars.
The childcare fraud brought to light by Nick Shirley is just the
latest scandal. In 2022, Federal prosecutors charged 47 defendants,
majority of whom were from the Minnesota Somali community, for
the role they played in Feeding Our Future.
Are they still in power in Minnesota?
Ms. ROBBINS. The Democrats?
Mr. MCGUIRE. No. The Feeding Our Future. What is going on
with them now?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, that program was a COVID-era child nutrition
program, and that is over. But there are ongoing child nutrition
programs that could be fraudulent.
So, I think they are still working their way through the Feeding
Our Future case, but I think there will be need for ongoing over-
sight of child nutrition programs.
Mr. MCGUIRE. With that, I yield back. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Langworthy
from Buffalo, New York. Okay.
The Chair recognizes—we will go to—is Mr. Stauber, are you
ready, prepared, or Mrs. Fischbach?
Mr. STAUBER. Representative Fischbach prior to me. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Okay. The Chair recog—we are going to get
to our waive-ons, and we may have a few more that will come in.
We have a few more Republicans have not asked questions yet.
But, Mrs. Fischbach, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
95
And before I begin my remarks, I want to enter into the record
an email shared by DHS whistleblowers. The email was written by
a senior DHS official and sent to other DHS leaders.
In the email, the DHS official talks about using military intel-
ligence resources to track down whistleblowers’ exact location in
this issue, and I believe this email was alluded to by Representa-
tive Rarick in her testimony.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you so much.
And I have one more. And I ask for unanimous consent to enter
into the record an article titled, ‘‘Minnesota Government Whistle-
blowers Claim They Were ‘Electronically Surveilled’, Had Pro-
motions Denied,’’ in the New York Post dated January 3, 2026.
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And, first, I would like to say thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing
us to waive on. This is an incredibly important issue in our state
and across the country, and it is something that comes up all the
time when we are out in the district.
And so, I thank—and I thank all of the legislators for being here
and for all of your work that you do in order to expose this and
dig into it and really figure out what is going on.
I think it was Mr. Burlison who asked if we were embarrassed,
but I am not embarrassed to be from Minnesota. What I am is real-
ly sad, that this is happening and this is what Minnesota is known
for now, this horrible fraud, because there are wonderful things
that Minnesota does have to offer. And so, as a lifelong Minneso-
tan, it makes me sad that this is what we are having to talk about.
And while some may want to downplay this fraud, I want to be
clear, this is an explicit and egregious coverup on the theft of tax-
payer dollars and hundreds of millions stolen from programs in-
tended to help feed children, provide housing, provide childcare,
even help individuals with autism. And we also have reports that
some of this funding is going to terrorist organizations, like was
mentioned earlier.
Democrats have been in charge in Minnesota for years. And I
was in the Minnesota Legislature. I know. And they specifically
wrote and passed legislation that reduced oversight when handing
out Federal funds. Democrats seized on COVID, in particular, to
yank back fraud protections just so that they could hand out money
as fast as possible. That was the whole thing. That was the mantra
during COVID is we have got to get it out fast, so we cannot have
all these regulations and checks and balances on them.
Unfortunately, though, this problem is not new, and it was not
just from COVID in Minnesota. Whistleblowers report that they
have been making reports for years. The Democrat leadership at
the state level in Minnesota has been actively suppressing whistle-
blowers, and I think some of the testimony that you have all given
today is pointing that out. And that is not an opinion. It is fact.
It is fact.
So, I am going to ask—maybe we are going to go over some of
this a little once again, but I want to make sure that everybody un-
derstands that there is a clear answer.
96
Representative Rarick, the tweet—where did my sign go? I have
a sign. Maybe we do not.
But there is an account that is working—that is, I believe, from
the whistleblowers, and I just wanted to note—there we go. Thank
you.
This behind me is the account. Is it run by one whistleblower?
Ms. RARICK. Madam Congressman, no. It actually is comprised of
over 1,000 state employees across multiple state agencies.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. So, this is not just a couple of people. This is
a lot, a lot of people bringing this to light.
And were the whistleblowers ever made to feel unsafe on their
attempts to report fraud?
Ms. RARICK. Yes, absolutely. I can give you two quotes that they
have in the seven-page document that was submitted for this Com-
mittee hearing.
Two things that they said is, think about your home, and what
if you lose your job? So, these are things said to whistleblowers.
Second thing was, we need information about where your kids go
to school and where their bus stops are.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. And, Representative Rarick, that is just incred-
ible stuff. And I know you mentioned it before, but I do think it
is worth repeating. Because we had whistleblowers, this could have
been happening, but there has been Democrat administration after
Democrat administration, including Walz and including—and the
newer—they have not addressed these things. And they have not
said, hey, whistleblowers, we believe you, and we are going to do
something about it. And so that is the concern.
And I just want to—I am running low on time, but I wanted to
just ask Representative Robbins. And I am sorry, Mr. Hudson, but
you have had some really good, good moments today, so I will go
to Representative Robbins.
As Chair of the Committee, if these claims of retaliatory action
are true, then it violates the law. So, if these claims are true, then
a state agency is violating our own state whistleblowers laws. Is
that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. So, the whistleblower statute is for civil penalties.
There is no criminal penalty for whistleblower retaliation in stat-
ute currently, but we are looking at that for the next session.
But that is why, when people say why haven’t these people who
have retaliated against the whistleblowers been prosecuted, it is
because there is no criminal penalty in statute.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Has there been anything by the Attorney Gen-
eral’s Office? And this is maybe a question that I will ask if he
comes. Anything by the Attorney General’s Office that would deal
with that?
Ms. ROBBINS. No. We have passed a law this session to expand
whistleblower protection because, prior to this session, they could
only report up through their supervisor or to the state attorney
general. And when they did, they were either ghosted or they were
retaliated against.
So, we expanded it, so now they can report to legislators and
they can report to law enforcement. And that is how we got this
just deluge of whistleblower reports, because now they have some-
where safe to report.
97
Mrs. FISCHBACH. And you have been very indulgent. And I will
just say, after 15 years of Democrat administration in Minnesota,
this massive fraud is coming to an end because we are going to get
to it.
And I appreciate the work that you have done on your com-
mittee, and we will do whatever we can to continue to bring it to
light and prosecute those folks involved. So, thank you very much.
And, Mr. Chair, I thank you very much for your indulgence.
Chairman COMER. Thank you, Mrs.——
Mr. BELL. Chair, I ask unanimous consent.
Chairman COMER. Who said that? Mr. Bell.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record this May 2025 report from the Senate Committee on Home-
land Security and Government Affairs entitled, ‘‘Undermining the
Watchdogs: The 19 Independent Inspectors General Fired by Presi-
dent Trump Uncovered Billions in Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.’’
Chairman COMER. Without objection, so ordered.
All right. Our next Minnesota waive-on is Mr. Finstad from Min-
nesota.
Mr. FINSTAD. Thank you, Chairman Comer. Thank you for hold-
ing this important hearing today. And thank you to our great Min-
nesota legislators for being here. God bless you and your work. It
has been so needed, and you have amplified and created such a
voice and opportunity for us to get to the bottom of this. So, thank
you.
Governor Walz’ incompetence has put a spotlight on our state by
enabling rampant fraud across federally funded state-administered
programs.
And for those that are not from Minnesota, in Minnesota the
Democrat Party goes by the DFL, Democrat-Farmer-Labor. Well, I
will tell you what, they kicked the farmer out a long time ago, and
that F now stands for fraud. And that is wholly owned by Governor
Walz, Lieutenant Governor Flanagan, and it is on them, and it will
be on them forever.
Minnesota taxpayers have had more than $9 billion and counting
taken from their pockets, yet the Walz Administration has failed
to take meaningful action to stop this. Since Feeding Our Future’s
scandal came to light, not a single individual responsible for ensur-
ing accountability to these federally funded programs has been
fired, not a single.
This would not stand a second in the private sector. I do not care
if you are a bank CEO, I do not care if you are a greeter at
Walmart. You would not have your job with the incompetence that
Governor Walz has displayed in Minnesota.
Since I was first elected in 2022, I have joined my Republican
colleagues and the congressional delegation sending numerous let-
ters to Governor Walz and his Administration to expose the law-
lessness occurring in our state, with no response.
The Minnesota State legislators here testifying have been on the
front lines working to combat this failure and Governor Walz’ fail-
ure to responsibly steward over the $9 billion in taxpayer money.
I thank you for appearing here today.
With that being said, you know, we are talking about programs—
housing stabilization, daycare, autism centers, Feeding Our Future.
98
I mean, these are all compassionate, good Minnesota values. We
want to take care of our neighbors in need. If our neighbors—if
they are struggling to find the amount of money to put food on
their table, we will take the shirt off our back to help our neighbors
in need.
These fraudsters preyed on the goodwill of Minnesotans. Min-
nesota is Minnesota nice, and these fraudsters knew it, and they
took advantage of us.
So, I am going to start with you, Representative Rarick. Thank
you again for your leadership. During your tenure in Minnesota
State Government, how long have you been working on this issue,
and what are some of the craziest, most egregious things that you
have seen really that have been identified by the incompetency of
our CEO/Governor of our state?
Ms. RARICK. Right. So, I was elected in 2013, started serving
then, and I literally have heard about fraud since 2013. And I will
tell you, every time that it was raised in a committee by myself or
my colleagues, we were essentially called racist and Islamophobic
or that the fraud really was not happening.
I remember with the daycare fraud when there was credible alle-
gations that it was $100 million back in 2013, 2014, 2015, some-
where in there, they prosecuted closer to $5 to $10 million. And so
instead of the $100 million, that was what was prosecuted. And so,
Democrats would say, well, it is really not. It is really not 100 mil-
lion. It is really just a couple.
And so, I know that we had a gentleman behind us come and tes-
tify in front of us, and he had a tracker, and they spent the entire
time besmirching his good character as opposed to actually talking
about the fraud. And that is what we have experienced nonstop
every day.
Mr. FINSTAD. Yes. So, thank you for that testimony, but also
thank you for being strong. Because the politics of intimidation,
name-calling, race-baiting, they want us to shut up. They want this
fraud to continue. And so, thank you for being strong.
You know, I represent 750,000 of our neighbors in southern Min-
nesota. It is God’s country down there. And, you know, I hear from
my neighbors, the Democrat control and what it has done to deci-
mate our daycare industry, the affordability, the access. We just
struggle with daycare in southern Minnesota. And I cannot help
but think that, wow, $9 billion sure would go a long ways to help
our neighbors in southern Minnesota.
You know, the Walz Administration has done crazy things. They
weaponized the Administration. Heck, we have daycares in south-
ern Minnesota getting fined for leaving ChapStick on their office
desk. They can find the time to do that, but they cannot find the
$9 billion. Ridiculous.
Representative Robbins, the Democrats at the state and Federal
level—so we are talking everyone from Angie Craig, Ilhan Omar,
Tina Smith, Amy Klobuchar, Tim Walz, Lieutenant Governor
Flanagan—have they helped at all in your committee work? Have
they been a part of it? Have they said, hey, we want to help try
to get rid of this fraud?
99
Ms. ROBBINS. No. I do not know of any Democrats who have
called out the Walz Administration for their absolute failure to pro-
tect taxpayer dollars and our vulnerable citizens.
Mr. FINSTAD. So, this is just unbelievable to me that we cannot,
in the face of this horrific fraud and crime that is going on, we can-
not for a brief moment rip the R and the D off our sweatshirt and
put the USA on and say enough is enough.
And so, what you are doing and by being here today, helping us
understand the details and the level of fraud in Minnesota is so im-
portant, we cannot thank you enough.
And, Chairman Comer, we stand ready to help you and this
Committee however we can to put an end to this.
Chairman COMER. We are serious about it, and we want to work
with you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Langworthy from Buffalo.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
and thank you for putting this hearing together so promptly after
all of this fraud was unveiled.
I am not going to get into belaboring all the facts that have been
revealed here already today. But, Representative Robbins, how long
do you believe that this fraud was allowed to operate in Minnesota
before anyone in state government actually decided to act?
Ms. ROBBINS. Well, we have had all this going on since 2014 at
least, and the Walz Administration has been in office seven years,
and they very belatedly took a few actions this fall.
So, they only came to the table to help pause programs and have
required audits because of the public pressure.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. So, we are looking at fraud going back 11
years at this point in untold sums of money.
And with the years that this has gone on, who in your mind
knew about this fraud and who do you think looked the other way?
Ms. ROBBINS. I think everybody in Minnesota knew about it.
There have been so many great local investigative journalistic sto-
ries on this, and I think the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor,
the Attorney General, and all of the agency heads have looked the
other way.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. I really want to salute you and your col-
leagues that were on the front end of this trying to get people to
pay attention to this.
And when you raised attention to this fraud, long before Nick
Shirley’s outstanding reporting, Governor Walz and Attorney Gen-
eral Ellison actually refused to take your claim seriously. Isn’t that
correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. We gave them a list in February of last year
of 72 childcare centers we thought were problematic that should be
investigated. And to my knowledge, they did not do anything with
the list we provided.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Now, as an elected official, you obviously are
out in the community. Is this blatant fraud something that people
on the street are talking about?
Ms. ROBBINS. All the time. They are furious.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. And they know it. It is in plain sight. Every-
one knows what is going on, but no one will act?
100
Ms. ROBBINS. Well, we are doing our best to act at the com-
mittee.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. You are. You are. But the people that are ac-
tually in power—you know, I come from New York, so I understand
what blue state living is all about.
But I—it is infuriating, because we see the same thing in our
home state. And when you have people in power that refuse to do
the right thing, even though the problem is an obvious one, it is
really disheartening to the constituents and the taxpayers, the
hardworking men and women paying the bills.
And, Representative Robbins, do you think that there was a po-
litical calculation that was made by the people that turn a blind
eye, that it was more beneficial for them to allow and kind of green
light the fraud, or were they afraid of political consequences if they
actually did something about that from a constituency of Somalis?
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes. I think they chose to protect the fraudsters
and the criminals over the whistleblowers and the taxpayers be-
cause, as the Somali investigator said, that feckless fear—they had
feckless fear from the establishment politicians and state agencies
when they were confronted with charges of racism and
Islamophobic.
So, they were afraid of being called racist or Islamophobic, the
Democrat politicians, and standing up to their base, so they just
turned a blind eye.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. And with this, you know, Somali population,
this is part of the Democrat Party’s base at this point in Min-
nesota. Isn’t that correct?
Ms. ROBBINS. Largely.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Largely. So, they were basically renting a con-
stituency through the fraud at the expense of the taxpayer. That
is wild.
Ms. ROBBINS. Yes.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. You do not have to answer that. I think that
we all know the answer to that.
And, Representative Hudson, there is a childcare affordability
crisis right now, and young families in my district and across the
country are making really tough choices to afford quality care.
What impact has this fraud had on waitlists and staffing and sim-
ply making resources available for legitimate childcare centers in
your constituency?
Mr. HUDSON. Well, as Mr. Finstad pointed out, in Minnesota,
there has been a longstanding attack upon family based childcare
where folks would run businesses out of their homes. And when
you are out of the city, that is usually the type of childcare you
would have access to.
And so in a climate where there have already been reductions in
the availability of people to be able to receive childcare, again,
going back to the firefighter putting out the fire analogy, yes, it
causes damage with the water, but it is necessary in this time even
though it hurts because of the blaze that Walz allowed to explode.
Mr. LANGWORTHY. It is amazing. This $9 billion in fraud went
uninvestigated, ignored, swept aside for years, not a single rogue
bureaucrat, but by every Democrat official in the State of Min-
101
nesota who presented with clear, damning evidence chose to look
the other way blindly.
I cannot wait to see Tim Walz and Keith Ellison in those seats
where you are sitting right now. But to everyone here, we cannot
ignore who truly benefited from this failure beyond the perpetra-
tors of the fraud. And as Governor Tim Walz and the entire Demo-
cratic leadership throughout a constituency’s votes that they
bought by looking the other way and letting this happen, they ef-
fectively green-lit this theft of billions of dollars in taxpayer money
through years of willful ignorance. And every single American tax-
payer deserves full accountability, because this is not limited to
just Minnesota. We have a lot of other states to start to look at.
I mean, all the big blue handout states—I live in one of them—we
have to open the Pandora’s Box here and find out how much money
has been siphoned off from America’s taxpayers.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Well said.
The Chair recognizes Congressman Jack from Georgia.
Mr. JACK. I also want to echo my support for Congressman
Langworthy’s remarks. Certainly associate myself with them. It is
all political, and it is very unfortunate.
I want to thank the witnesses for testifying today, and I would
also like to thank our Chairman for convening this hearing so expe-
ditiously. Less than two weeks have passed since the Nation was
caught in this just horrible, horrible crisis watching this unfold,
and here we are with action today.
We have talked a lot about the $9 billion in fraud. I like quanti-
fying it because, you know, more often than not, we throw around
the biggest numbers here in Washington and sometimes it is hard
to—sometimes it is hard to quantify it.
It takes about a second to count a dollar bill, and that is nine
billion seconds, means that if we started counting in 1741, 285
years ago, we would just now be finishing $9 billion worth of a
count. So, take that data point to heart.
But I want to concentrate my line of questioning today on the
whistleblowers. And I know a lot has been discussed, but as we
near the end of this hearing, I want to start with Representative
Rarick. And it is our understanding, as has been discussed today,
the Department of Human Services whistleblowers claim that they
have faced retaliation from senior Minnesota Department of
Human Services officials, including appointees on behalf of Gov-
ernor Walz. And I just want you to explain to us again how these
administrators have retaliated against whistleblowers.
Ms. RARICK. Right. So, the threats were pretty intense. And as
I have said, their jobs were threatened, they had strange questions
demanding answers about where their children went to school,
where their bus stops were. They were told that if you do not do
what we tell you to do or not do what we tell you to do, you will
lose your job, you will lose that job with cause, which means, in
Minnesota, that you do not get unemployment insurance, you also
could lose your retirement plan.
Also, you would be blacklisted off of all state agencies. And I
would note that that also includes Hennepin and Ramsey Counties,
102
our biggest counties, because they are Democrat run, and maybe
even the University of Minnesota. I am going to throw that in too.
Probably some of our biggest cities, like Rochester, Duluth, that
are very Democrat leaning. So, it is a very vast threat. They have
also threatened them with sort of a vague military intelligence.
So, there was one—I have the email right here that was just sub-
mitted, I believe, by Congresswoman Fischbach, and it says things
like, I would like to use my former colleagues in the Army to locate
where you are using your IP address, and I do not have that—he
says, I do not have that technology anymore, but I can get it in a
heartbeat.
So, there were vague threats, and I believe there was more
threats beyond that, but it was very expansive threats.
Mr. JACK. Well, I am glad you mentioned that. I actually wanted
to talk about that. As I understand it, it was the, and I think, to
your point, she entered it into the record. But the interim Deputy
Assistant Commissioner of Operations—for the folks watching at
home—of the Department of Human Services in Minnesota alleg-
edly was trying to use a contact in the military during the Biden
Administration to track whistleblowers’ whereabouts.
I presume this is illegal under Minnesota law, but would love for
you to indulge us as to whether or not it is.
Ms. RARICK. You know, I do not know for sure if it is illegal in
Minnesota. If it is not, it certainly should be. I think most of what
happened to the whistleblowers is illegal. But the control over the
state, the control over the largest counties, the control over some
of our largest cities is controlled by Democrats, and so this was al-
lowed to continue.
Mr. JACK. And to the best of your knowledge, whether it be Gov-
ernor Dayton or Governor Pawlenty before, were whistleblowers
treated in such a manner under those administrations or is this
unique to the Walz Administration?
Ms. RARICK. I do not have any reports particularly through the
Pawlenty Administration. I know that fraud was beginning to be
uncovered at the very tail end of his Administration but mostly
under Democrat rule. But I do not know of this kind of retaliation
in any other administration besides the Walz Administration.
Mr. JACK. Thank you for sharing that with us.
And I just want to close out, some Minnesota officials claim they
had no knowledge of this fraud, just found out about it, which I
think we all know is demonstrably false. But I am just curious,
could you elaborate for this Committee on the many ways by which
Governor Walz could have been made aware of this? I mean, he
certainly was made aware of this, turned a blind eye. I just want
to make sure that we understand, as a Committee, the many meth-
ods by which he was informed.
Ms. RARICK. So, there were a multitude of legislative auditor re-
ports, so much so that I had read into the record what Jim Nobles,
the last legislative auditor before Judy Randall—he had been the
legislative auditor for 38 years, and he was so disgusted by the ac-
tions of Governor Walz that he wrote a couple comments in the
Star Tribune saying that they literally just needed to do basic fi-
nancial controls, and it is behooving to him—or confounding to
him, I should say, as to why they did not.
103
So, he is a very much a nonpartisan, nonpolitical person, and he
was shocked at what he found.
Mr. JACK. I want to thank all of our witnesses for testimony
today.
And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
And I believe our last questioner is our last waive-on from Min-
nesota, Representative Stauber.
Mr. STAUBER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
And after all the—after all the conversations today, you wonder
why the Department of Justice cannot get the voter rolls out of
Minnesota and the Secretary of Ag cannot get the SNAP benefits
from Minnesota to make sure there is no fraud.
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for holding this hearing.
And I also want to thank our witnesses, whose years of hard work
in Minnesota are exposing these revelations, are finally garnering
the national attention that they deserve.
And finally, I want to thank the numerous whistleblowers who
are exposing Tim Walz’ failures as Governor. As we have heard
today, these brave men and women are risking their careers to re-
veal the truth, while Tim Walz is actively attempting to threaten
and suppress them. I am here to say it will not work, and we stand
with the whistleblowers.
I am going to shift gears and ask you about Minnesota’s new
paid family leave program that the Governor has been touting dur-
ing this fraud scandal.
Representative Rarick, under the paid family leave program in
Minnesota, who can I take leave or care for, and is it limited to
family or dependents?
Ms. RARICK. Thank you, Congressman Stauber. No, it is not lim-
ited to just family. One would think that it was, but there is some-
thing that the Democrats built into the law that said, if I set up
an expectation of care, with no documentation, by the way, no at-
testation, absolutely no documentation, then that is good enough in
Minnesota.
Mr. STAUBER. So, I could take care of somebody that is just a
friend of mine?
Ms. RARICK. Congressman, absolutely.
Mr. STAUBER. So, it does not matter if they are related, if I have
had a past relationship or closer, I can just go and ask my—or tell
my employer I am leaving for 12 weeks or eight weeks and get 90
percent of my pay and take care of that person, right?
Ms. RARICK. You could do that, yes. And so, it is a sliding scale.
It is not all of the people would get 90 percent, but the vast major-
ity, I believe, depending on your salary, would get 90 percent. And,
yes, you could go take care of anybody because there is no docu-
mentation.
Mr. STAUBER. What kind of proof of care would I have to provide
to the state to demonstrate that I am actually taking care of you
during my paid family leave?
Ms. RARICK. No, there is absolutely no documentation. So, you
have to provide and prove absolutely nothing.
Mr. STAUBER. So, if I do not show up and take care of who I say
I am taking care of, nothing is going to happen to me?
104
Ms. RARICK. That is correct. You could go to Puerto Rico, you
could go to Istanbul. It does not matter where you go or what you
do, there is no requirement to document.
Mr. STAUBER. So, I can say that I am just caring for anyone, and
the State of Minnesota would require my boss to give me a 12-week
vacation without any proof?
Ms. RARICK. That is exactly how the Democrats wrote that law,
that is correct.
Mr. STAUBER. Is a licensed American doctor required to certify
that this person needs my immediate and uninterrupted care?
Ms. RARICK. So, the people—the medical professionals, it is a
very, very broad category. And, no, they do not have to be an Amer-
ican, midwife, doctor, chiropractor, orthopedic surgeon, none of
those things. It can be in any country.
Mr. STAUBER. Does the state require the person I am claiming
to care for to be present in Minnesota or even in the United States
of America?
Ms. RARICK. No, Congressman. That person could be anywhere.
Mr. STAUBER. Somalia?
Ms. RARICK. Absolutely.
Mr. STAUBER. So, you are telling me I can get a foreign doctor
without an American license to just check a box, and I get a state-
mandated paid vacation to Somalia or any other country. Is that
correct?
Ms. RARICK. That is how the law was written by Democrats in
Minnesota, yes.
Mr. STAUBER. This is incredibly concerning.
With what little time I have left, I want to open this up to the
entire panel. Is there anything else you would like to address re-
garding the paid family leave program? And I will start with Rep-
resentative Robbins.
Ms. ROBBINS. Thank you. We always talk about how important
it is to stop fraud on the front end. So, our committee held a hear-
ing on this paid family leave law that took effect January 1 back
in November. And we grilled the Department of Employment and
Economic Development trying to get them to shore up some of
these definitions, trying to put some guardrails on this program.
And they just assured us over and over, they have got it covered,
there will not be any fraud, do not worry about it. But I have al-
ready had whistleblower reports since the program started January
1 of fraud.
So, we are going to have to get a handle on this, and I think it
is the next fraud frontier in Minnesota.
Mr. STAUBER. Representative Hudson, anything you would like to
add on the paid family leave program in Minnesota?
Mr. HUDSON. Just to put points that Representative Rarick put
as concisely as possible. It is humorous but true that you could
quite literally have a witch doctor approve your vacation to Soma-
lia. That is how loose the rules are written.
Mr. STAUBER. Listen, I am proud to be from Minnesota. I was
born, raised, and living in Minnesota, raising my family there. This
is going to stop, and you folks are at the front of it. Minnesotans
have had enough. We are hardworking people. We will not allow
105
our tax dollars to go to fraud. And I commend that the three of you
and other folks back in Minnesota that want to stop this.
And, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair, I seek recognition to make motion for
a subpoena.
Chairman COMER. State your motion.
Ms. PRESSLEY. I would like to make a motion to subpoena the
Department of Homeland Security for all documents and footage
related to the murder of a woman by ICE that took place in Min-
neapolis, Minnesota, today.
Chairman COMER. A motion has been made. The Committee will
hold this motion in abeyance till the end of today’s hearing.
And we will prepare to close now. That concludes all of our ques-
tions.
In closing, I want to again thank our witnesses for being here
today. Welcome to the House Oversight Committee. This was a
pretty cordial committee hearing for us, so we—and very impor-
tant.
Before we adjourn, I want to yield to Ranking Member Garcia for
his closing remarks, and then I will give my closing remarks.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just before we close, I also want to mention the news of this hor-
rific killing in Minneapolis, Minnesota. We are talking about Min-
nesota right now. This was a killing by an ICE agent. There are
videos that are now online. There is testimony that is being
brought to light. It is horrific. I encourage folks to watch those vid-
eos and see what has happened for themselves. And I am hopeful
that this Committee investigates this incident and that we have
full accountability. So, I want to thank Representative Pressley for
her motion.
Now, we have heard a lot today and particularly a lot of bigoted
smears against an entire community. Now, some Republican Mem-
bers of this Committee said or implied that somehow all Somalis
are now suspected fraudsters or terrorists.
Now, Somali Americans are overwhelmingly U.S. citizens with
the same rights as any Member of this Committee. And the rest
and a vast majority of them are just hardworking folks who are
trying to take care of their families and playing by the rules.
And we should be clear that if we want to investigate fraud, we
should start by investigating 1600 Pennsylvania. We all know that
fraud is a betrayal of the public’s trust, and Democrats agree that
we must be rigorous in conducting oversight wherever it exists.
But conducting rigorous oversight does not somehow exclude the
President or the administration or the DOJ and what is happening
there or the rampant crimes that are happening right now all
across other agencies. We know that holding fraudsters accountable
does not mean granting them full and unconditional Presidential
pardons because they are wealthy supporters of the President.
President Trump last year gave out 25 get out of jail free cards
from fraudsters alone, 25. He pardoned them from paying back
more than $1 billion they owed to their victims. This is wrong and
it is un-American. We have to make sure the victims of fraud are
not forced to suffer any more.
106
And we also know that cutting off childcare and family support
for thousands of innocent families is not the way to protect victims.
In fact, it punishes victims. These attacks are harming parents,
children, and childcare providers as we speak.
Many childcare providers, not just in Minnesota but across the
country, are receiving death threats. Childcare centers have been
vandalized, and the children’s information has been stolen in some
cases. Childcare providers in states across the country have re-
ported that they will have to close if they lose Federal funding.
Parents are saying they have to quit their jobs because they will
no longer be able to have childcare for their families and while they
are at work. These cuts will make it harder for families to put food
on the table as grocery costs continue to increase. We should be
protecting those families and children who are being hurt by all of
this.
Let us go after the big fraud in our government, and that in-
cludes the fraud and corruption at the White House.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The Ranking Member yields back.
And I will conclude by saying today we have heard about the
shocking, rampant, and long ongoing fraud in Minnesota’s social
service programs. This fraud has shocked and outraged the Amer-
ican people, and rightfully so. The scale of this fraud is not just
something we have seen before, and I am pretty confident this is
just the tip of the iceberg.
The Trump Administration has taken a whole-of-government ap-
proach to rooting out fraud. The Trump Administration has already
uncovered at least $9 billion in fraud. These criminals have stolen
taxpayer dollars from all Americans to fund lavish cars, homes,
and vacations here in the United States and abroad. Some of the
stolen money is even allegedly going overseas to support terrorists.
Our witnesses—the Chairwoman and two members of the Min-
nesota House of Representatives Fraud Prevention and State Agen-
cy Oversight Policy Committee—have been sounding the alarm on
this fraud for years. Democrats have attempted to distract the
American people from this widespread fraud and accuse investiga-
tors of racism. This should not be a partisan issue, but they clearly
do not take this issue seriously. Either they do not take fraud seri-
ously or they just do not care. It is one or the other.
The most vulnerable are suffering as a result. These programs
are meant to feed needy kids, provide services to autistic children,
house low-income and disabled Americans, and provide healthcare
to vulnerable Medicaid recipients. The Walz Administration has
kept this money flowing for years, oftentimes behind closed doors.
When whistleblowers came forward about this fraud, the Walz
Administration retaliated against employees who warned and alert-
ed the Administration to fraud occurring within these social pro-
grams.
There are supposed to be checks and balances in our system to
prevent this, both on the Federal and state levels. Every agency
that lost hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars has well-
paid staff that are supposed to prevent this. That is their job. They
are Inspectors General. That is their job. They have huge staff. We
107
have jurisdiction over the IGs. Many have failed, and they need to
be held accountable.
Now, I want to close by saying we have had four Minnesota Re-
publicans to waive on this Committee. If there was a Committee
hearing about fraud in Kentucky and I was not on the Committee,
I would want to waive on the Committee. But not a single Demo-
crat requested to waive on the Committee from the State of Min-
nesota.
And there is one member of the Minnesota delegation, Rep-
resentative Omar, who coincidentally is of Somali descent, did not
request to be in this hearing. I will publicly invite her to come to
the next hearing. And she does not have to, but she can request
to be waived on, and I will gladly grant that request.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an application
unsealed by the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota on December 18, 2025, for law enforcement to execute
a search warrant on Ultimate Home Health Services, LLC, for de-
frauding Minnesota’s Independent Community Supports Medicaid
Program. This fraudulent provider’s negligence resulted in the
death of a man who suffered from severe mental health. I ref-
erenced this tragedy in my opening statement.
We are not going to—this is not it. This is just the beginning. We
want to again thank you for being here. We are going to work with
you to see that these Federal funds go to people in Minnesota who
they are supposed to go to. I support President Trump putting a
halt on all Federal funding to these government social programs in
Minnesota until we get a handle on where this is going.
And thank you all for doing that. We will work with you and do
everything we can to hold people accountable and to stop the fraud
and get the backs of the American taxpayers.
Pursuant to the previous order, the Chair declares the Com-
mittee in recess, subject to the call of the Chair. We plan to recon-
vene at 4 p.m.
The Committee now stands in recess, and the witnesses may be
excused. Thank you all.
[Recess.]
Chairman COMER. The Committee will reconvene. I know we
have votes very quickly on the House Floor. If we do not get this
done, we are going to have to come back and vote after the Floor
votes, however long that lasts.
So, the first motion is the Luna motion to subpoena Neville
Singham. It is now brought under consideration.
Does any Member wish to speak on the motion?
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the motion.
Chairman COMER. State your amendment.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you. Pursuant to clause 2(k)(6) of House Rule
XI, the Committee shall subpoena Les Wexner to sit for a deposi-
tion before the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
And, Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized to explain the
amendment briefly.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Explain your amendment.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
108
This is an amendment, of course, to Representative Luna’s mo-
tion. Les Wexner is a long-time benefactor of Jeffrey Epstein, and
at one point was Epstein’s only documented client. Maria Farmer
was abused in a house attached to Wexner’s Ohio property and
guarded by Wexner’s security staff.
Virginia Giuffre named Wexner in a deposition as one of the men
she was trafficked to. Wexner also paid for Epstein’s home in New
York City. There is probably no one more important as relates to
the financing and the work of this investigation, which both sides
of the aisle are interested in, have voted to move forward, than en-
suring that we bring Mr. Wexner in to come and be deposed by this
Committee.
Public reporting has documented their longstanding ties. He
should answer our questions in a nonpartisan way to get the truth
to the Epstein investigation, and that is the motion.
Chairman COMER. Would you—let us see. So, I guess we are
going to debate the amendment to the motion.
Would you yield the question?
Mr. GARCIA. Sure.
Chairman COMER. We are serious about the Epstein investiga-
tion, and I think you have seen a lot of our Members stand up and
make it very clear they want to get to the bottom of Epstein. No-
body wants to do it more than I do.
We also want to hear from Bill Clinton, and you all—we voted
in a bipartisan manner to subpoena Bill Clinton, but we have not
gotten confirmation for President Clinton to come in for a tran-
scribed interview or now a deposition.
So, do you all—are you all going to help us try to get Clinton in?
I figure you guys have his number—I do not.
Mr. GARCIA. I have been very clear, and I think the Committee
agrees, that we are willing to talk to anyone, including the former
President, if they have information regarding the Epstein inves-
tigation.
And so, the motion in front of us right now is on Les Wexner,
who is central to the Epstein investigation and probably knows
more than anyone else about the financing and has been named by
survivors.
That is in addition to Luna’s motion, which if part of the amend-
ment, we can certainly take that vote.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Any other discussion on the Garcia
amendment? Ms. Stansbury.
Ms. STANSBURY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to echo my support for this subpoena and say two
things: One, this is not a quid pro quo. This is an investigation.
And so, we will subpoena and support subpoenas for any cocon-
spirator and anyone who has evidence that is important in this
case.
Second, I want to note that this individual is actually named in
the Department of Justice emails that were released in the partial
release by the Administration as one of the ten coconspirators the
Department of Justice was investigating and was actually named.
And finally, I just want to say this, Mr. Chairman: The Depart-
ment of Justice has released, as we understand it, only one percent
of the files in their possession. And I think we really want to know
109
why this Committee is not demanding that DOJ come in front of
us immediately to account for this.
And, with that, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Any other—Mrs. Luna, your request to speak
on the Garcia amendment to your motion.
Mrs. LUNA. Yes. I think that this is a sound motion for subpoena
because Les Wexner has been named by victims and also, too, is
in a number of documentaries.
But I would like to at least offer my opinion and refute what Ms.
Stansbury said regarding some of the files that have been released
regarding some of the files that have been released. There have
been thousands of files released, so much so that, yes, there have
been redactions, but most of the redactions, to my knowledge, have
been pertaining to either Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) ma-
terials and/or victim information.
I know that in one instance there was potentially a breach of
that, of which the DOJ immediately corrected. But we have also
been working, at least my office has, with the Department of Jus-
tice to make sure that victims have received their direct informa-
tion.
So, please understand, at least from my perspective, that it is not
our opinion that there have been a holdback. I do know that the
documents are on a rolling basis as well, similar to the other de-
classified files. However, aside from that, I do support Garcia’s
amendment and I would encourage my colleagues to do so.
Chairman COMER. All right. Any other discussion on the Garcia
amendment? Seeing none, all those in favor of the amendment, of
the Garcia amendment to the Luna motion signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, say no.
[No response.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the amendment is agreed to.
Mr. GARCIA. We want a recorded vote. Actually, no, we do not.
Chairman COMER. Now, the debate is on the—does any Member
wish to speak on the Luna motion, as amended?
Representative Luna.
Mrs. LUNA. Just if someone is tracking, Neville Singham was re-
ferred to the Department of Justice, I believe, for Foreign Agents
Registration Act (FARA) violations by then-Senator Rubio when he
served on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Neville Singham, regardless of what you might feel about your
colleagues, has been a mechanism and funding arm of the Chinese
Communist Party. He is not a registered agent by FARA, and has
been connected to a number of riots, to include the anti-ICE riots
being funded in Los Angeles as well as a group that was tied to
and being investigated for the assassination of Charlie Kirk, known
as—I think it was a group of Socialism and Liberation, and then
also to—has been avoiding our requests for him to come bring in-
formation to Congress.
He is definitely someone that is anti-American in ideology. And
regardless of where you might stand, even on topics like Israel
versus Palestine, is funding certain groups that actually sow dis-
110
cord in this country with no efforts to actually resolve the issues,
only to get us to fight one another.
So, I would encourage you all, at least if you do not politically
agree with one another, to at least respect the fact that he is a
known foreign agent to China, has not been registered as such, has
been made to fund riots and has been known to be the result of
many of our own Americans being targeted with violence. And as
a result of that, I do think that he should face subpoena.
In the event that he is not subpoenaed or that he does not an-
swer the subpoena, I will be making a motion for inherent con-
tempt, and I encourage my colleagues to support this motion.
Chairman COMER. Luna yields back.
Min, Representative Min.
Mr. MIN. Thank you. Being new to this Committee, I guess I am
just curious why this is happening in this hearing, and why we did
not have a chance to review the subpoena with some notice. You
know, as much as I want to appreciate what you say and just take
it at face value, we are all learning this right now, and it does not
really give us a lot of time to do our research to determine the va-
lidity of your subpoena request. And so, I just really—from a proce-
dural perspective, I am just curious if this is normal.
Mrs. LUNA. If I can respond and answer.
Chairman COMER. Do you yield to Luna or Garcia?
Mr. MIN. I yield to Garcia first.
Mr. GARCIA. No, I just want to add that I understand his con-
cerns. I am going to recommend that we vote yes on the Luna mo-
tion. I think the Representative made clear her support for the dep-
osition that we are going to have with Mr. Wexner, and so, that
is going to be my recommendation for our Committee.
Mrs. LUNA. And if I could just answer the question. So, as part
of the rules, if subpoenas are not sent in the traditional fashion
through the Chairman, individual Members can actually make mo-
tions where the Committee as a whole can vote on it.
And so, because Neville Singham has been avoiding receipt of
our request for him to come in and just give basic information, it
is because he has been known to be funding these groups that are
literally causing us to eat each other alive, even sometimes within
the House of Representatives.
I do think that he needs to answer for that. And so, to answer
your question, that is why I made the motion today.
Chairman COMER. Any other Members wish to speak?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the Luna motion, as amended
by the Garcia amendment, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, say no.
[No response.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the motion, as amended, is agreed to.
Next up is the Luna motion number two to subpoena Jonathan
Greenblatt.
Does any Member wish to speak on the motion? Mrs. Luna.
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment.
Chairman COMER. We will do your amendment first. Okay.
111
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you. I have an amendment to Representative
Luna. Pursuant to clause 2(k)(6) of House Rule XI, the Committee
shall subpoena Governor Tate Reeves of Mississippi to testify in a
hearing before the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
And I have some comments if you would like to recognize those
now.
Chairman COMER. All right. State your comments.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to recognize a motion. We, of course, had a big hear-
ing today. And we certainly should not just be concerned with
fraud that could be happening in states with Democratic Governors
but also those with Republican Governors. Fraud should be looked
at anywhere it happens.
The Wall Street Journal on Monday reported a massive Mis-
sissippi welfare scandal. Mississippi has seen years of scandals
under multiple Governors, but we have been silent as a Committee.
We did not have any witnesses from Mississippi here today and
Oversight Republicans are not calling in Governor Tate.
So, this is an opportunity for the American people to hear about
fraud wherever it occurs, and this motion will do just that. And I
yield back.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Now, the Chair recognize Mrs. Luna to
speak on the Garcia amendment to your motion number two.
Mrs. LUNA. Fraud is fraud. I support this. I encourage my col-
leagues to do it. It does not matter if they are Republican or not.
If he is guilty of it, bring him in.
Chairman COMER. Any other debate?
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I am wondering if the gentlemen
would allow me to move to amend his amendment to include the
Governor of Arizona, who admitted that they had $2.5 billion worth
of fraud in Medicaid fraud just a year ago. The Attorney General
did.
Chairman COMER. Okay. This is where my Future Farmers of
America (FFA) parliamentary procedure came in place. Ellie, you
can back me up. Amendment—there is a motion to amend the
amendment. Do we go into that a motion? All right.
So, Mr. Biggs has made an amendment to the Garcia amendment
to the Luna motion. Does anyone wish to speak on the Biggs
amendment to the amendment? And his is to subpoena the Arizona
Governor. Right. Okay.
Mr. GARCIA. Look, I am glad that the Representative wants to
subpoena his opponent in the Governor’s race. Just to be clear.
Mr. BIGGS. If it makes you happy, I will say not her. Let us bring
in the AG.
Mr. GARCIA. No, I mean just to be clear.
Mr. BIGGS. Bring in the AG.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, sir, since I have the floor, I just want
to say that my amendment is clear. We heard from one state today.
I think it is important that we hear from Governor Tate of Mis-
sissippi. That is the amendment that I am going to let stand as
presented. If other motions are made, we can vote on those as ap-
propriate.
112
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs to specify his
amendment to the amendment on who we are——
Mr. BIGGS. Yes, thanks, Mr. Chairman.
I am happy to reword my amendment to instead of the Governor
of Arizona if you want the Attorney General, because the Attorney
General is the one who stood up a year and a half ago and said
that she discovered $2.5 billion worth of waste in Arizona’s Med-
icaid program, and that we need to find out more about that. So,
I am content with doing that.
And I just find it hilariously hypocritical to say, well, we want
the dude from Mississippi because he is a Republican. But when
you want to bring in someone from my home state, not even run-
ning against me, okay, that is why I moved it. And to say, well,
we cannot do that. We cannot do that because that would be—I do
not know.
It is just—because this is the cycle you guys chose to get on. She
has admitted—she has admitted, the Attorney General, that there
is $2.5 billion worth of waste in the Medicaid program. I submitted
that for the record earlier today. And, well, let us have at it.
Ms. CROCKETT. Will the gentleman yield?
Chairman COMER. Okay. Okay. So, the amendment to the
amendment is to subpoena the Arizona Attorney General. Does
anyone wish to speak on the amendment to the amendment? Mr.?
Mr. GARCIA. I will speak after Ms. Crockett.
Chairman COMER. Ms. Crockett.
Ms. CROCKETT. I just wanted to clarify, because I think the gen-
tleman from Arizona said that this was over a year ago, a year and
a half ago, if I am correct. Is that correct?
Mr. BIGGS. Are you asking me to yield? Yes, I will yield. What
is the question?
Ms. CROCKETT. So, you said over a year and a half ago?
Mr. BIGGS. No, it was—I believe it was last summer, about a
year ago.
Ms. CROCKETT. Okay. So, about a year ago, there was an oppor-
tunity for you as a Representative and presumably before you were
actually running for office. I think the concern is about using Fed-
eral dollars to further political aspirations.
And as someone who was representing Arizona, there should
have been an opportunity for you to do something to try to sub-
poena. You could have tried to open an investigation.
We know that the Republicans are the ones that control this
Committee and have controlled this Committee for some time. So,
I just wanted to say that I definitely am opposed to this particular
portion of the—I guess it is the amendment to the amendment.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Fallon to speak on
the amendment to the amendment.
Mr. FALLON. Yes, I support the amendment to the amendment
because, I mean, just—a lot of us served in the state legislature,
and I did for eight years in the House and Senate in Texas.
This is a systemic problem across all states. I want to—I mean,
we are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars, of criminals
and scum bags stealing money that is not going to where it is in-
tended. So, I do not give a rat’s nuggets if it is Arizona, Mississippi,
113
wherever. We need to be rooting this stuff out. So, I am fully in
support of Mr. Biggs, and I think your efforts are noble.
I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Any other Members wish to——
Mr. FALLON. Or I yield to Mr. Biggs.
Mr. BIGGS. Yes, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding. I do find
it rich to say, oh, you should have subpoenaed this a year ago. Just
like you guys could have subpoenaed anybody you wanted to a year
ago as well.
So, let me just add to this by saying our current Governor is
being investigated, and I do not want to get into that because she
is currently being investigated for corruption and abuse.—I am not
trying to get into that.
What I am trying to get into is what I thought—I thought we
would reached some comity here that we are going to be going after
fraud wherever it sits in these social welfare programs.
And so, you did not like it. You thought I might be doing it for
political purposes. It is not for political purposes. This is because
Arizona has a systemic problem in their Medicaid program of $2.5
billion fraud that the Democrat Attorney General pointed out. Let
us have her come in and explain how this has happened and what
needs to be done to fix the systemic problems in Arizona. Maybe
that would be helpful to fix the problems nationwide. That is all.
I yield back to the gentleman from Texas. Thank you.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman from Texas.
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia for the
amendment on the amendment.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you. Just a final comment on this. I oppose
the amendment. And here is—to be very clear, today we talked
about five states, all states with Democratic Governors. Focused on
one. The motion that we are making as an amendment is very
clear. It is to bring in one Republican Governor in comparison to
what the Majority has proposed in the past, and that is where we
are leaving it.
And so, at a minimum, the Majority should want to bring in one
Republican compared to the six that we discussed today. And so,
we are going to—I am going to close.
Chairman COMER. Would you yield?
Mr. GARCIA. Sure.
Chairman COMER. So, I am fine if there is fraud in any state—
will you work with us to get Walz back in here so he can have an
opportunity to defend what was stated today and to work with us
on that?
Mr. GARCIA. I think that Governor Walz right now is looking at
coming in to the Committee. Obviously, I am happy to have anyone
in front of us that is willing to explain.
Chairman COMER. Well, a lot of people are looking, but, I mean,
are they going to do it?
Mr. GARCIA. We are willing—Oversight Democrats are willing to
talk to any person, any Governor, any person that can be in front
of us that we can explain issues that are important to the Amer-
ican public. We have no issue with Governor Walz coming in to tes-
tify.
114
Chairman COMER. Any other Members seek recognition on the
Biggs amendment to the Garcia amendment?
Mr. Perry.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, if it will make it less political, if the
maker of the secondary amendment would like me to offer it in his
name, coming from nowhere close to Arizona, to subpoena the Ari-
zona Attorney General regarding her statements about known
fraud in Arizona, I would be happy to do that.
Mr. BIGGS. I will let you do it. Have at it.
Mr. PERRY. Well, then, since he is willing to do it, we can
then——
Chairman COMER. He would have to—Mr. Biggs would have to
withdraw his amendment to the amendment.
Mrs. LUNA. Can we get back to Greenblatt?
Mr. BIGGS. Then I will withdraw and leave it in your capable
hands.
Mr. PERRY. The gentleman has withdrawn. And then we can—
I will make the same motion to subpoena, as a secondary amend-
ment to the primary amendment to the primary resolution, the At-
torney General from Arizona regarding her position and statements
on fraud in Arizona in the Medicaid program.
Chairman COMER. I want to make sure everybody understands
this. Representative Biggs has withdrawn his amendment to the
amendment, and now Mr. Perry has filed an amendment to the
amendment in the same language to subpoena the Arizona Attor-
ney General.
Does everyone understand that?
Okay. Now, do any Democrats—Mr. Min, you have had your
hand up over there.
Mr. MIN. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I appreciated our conversa-
tion earlier today when you expressed very clearly that this should
not be a partisan committee, that we should go after fraud in all
forms, and at which point you also agreed that having some kind
of investigative hearing into Mississippi might be appropriate.
I appreciate your support of this amendment to the bill. If we are
going to have amendments to amendments, I guess the one ques-
tion I have, and this might be a proposal, the Inspectors General
were all fired at the beginning of Trump’s term in his second term.
Those are the primary watchdogs for protecting the American tax-
payer from waste, fraud, and abuse of this kind.
So, why are we not calling in Pam Bondi and anybody else who
might have had knowledge and input into the decision to fire these
Inspectors General as well as their staffs?
And so, I guess I would propose an amendment to the amend-
ment to the amendment that we have a hearing and subpoena Pam
Bondi and others in this regard.
Chairman COMER. Are you making an official motion to amend
the amendment?
Mr. MIN. Yes, I am.
Chairman COMER. And what is your motion?
Mr. MIN. That we subpoena Pam Bondi.
Chairman COMER. You are making a motion to subpoena Pam
Bondi.
115
Mr. MIN. And anyone else with knowledge around the decisions
and input on the decisions to fire and terminate the Inspectors
General.
Chairman COMER. Now, I want to remind everybody they have
called votes, and I have a feeling this is going to keep going on and
on and on. But you have made a motion to amend the amendment
to the amendment. Yes, you can only do that twice. That is a par-
liamentary rule. Okay. So, you are done speaking. All right.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Donalds.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee re-
cess—or the Committee—do you want to call the question or do you
just want to recess so we can go vote and come back and finish this
up?
Chairman COMER. Okay, because we have votes called.
Mr. DONALDS. I am flexible either way.
Chairman COMER. Right. I think that is a fair—they called votes
about ten minutes ago.
So, pursuant to the previous order, the Committee will recess
until immediately following the votes.
The Committee stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman COMER. The Committee will reconvene. And the Chair
recognizes Mrs. Luna to talk about her motion that has been
amended a couple of times.
The Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna.
Mrs. LUNA. So, in the name of avoiding watering down our initial
amendment, I am going to withdraw the initial motion, Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Without objection, so ordered.
Okay. So, now the Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna for Luna motion
three.
Mrs. LUNA. I think that was a Mace motion, sir. Oh, we are
doing the next one? Okay.
Chairman COMER. So, all right. We are going to go ahead and
do—the Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna from Florida for her third mo-
tion.
Mrs. LUNA. Yes. I do encourage all of my colleagues to support
this. As you know, with what happened with recent events in Ven-
ezuela, there was a leak of classified information as well as result-
ing in one of the journalists that obtained that information—and
I will say credits to the news agencies for realizing that American
lives could be put in jeopardy if this leaked information was pub-
lished. They did put the kibosh on it.
But after the fact, Seth Hart proceeded to dox the Delta Force
commander, or a Delta Force commander, associated or thinking
that they were associated with the mission in Venezuela, resulting
in his children and his family being harassed and targeted, not just
by activists here in the United States, but potentially by narco-ter-
rorists.
I do encourage the entire Committee to issue the subpoena of
Seth Harp, as he should be held accountable for potentially leaking
classified information and doxxing servicemembers, putting their
lives and their family members at jeopardy by narco-terrorists.
Chairman COMER. Okay. So, Mrs. Luna has made that motion.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia for an amendment.
116
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I do have an amendment to the motion made by Representative
Luna. And to make that amendment, I just want to say, pursuant
to clause 2(k)(6) of House Rule XI, the Committee shall subpoena
co-executors of the Epstein estate, Darren Indyke and Richard
Kahn to sit for depositions before the House Committee on Over-
sight and Government Reform.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to explain the amendment.
Chairman COMER. Proceed.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I know as you and so many others now—and surely Mrs.
Luna is aware—Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn were Jeffrey
Epstein’s longtime lawyer and accountant.
Few people know more about what Epstein did and who he met
with, and certainly his crimes, then the co-executors and bene-
ficiaries of Epstein’s estate.
We have heard directly from survivors, as we all know, about
both of those gentlemen. And to get justice for the survivors, which
I think all of us on this Committee want to get, we certainly should
hear from these two men.
And, with that, I would like to both support Representative
Luna’s motion and make this amendment.
Chairman COMER. Does anyone else seek recognition on the Gar-
cia amendment to the Luna motion?
The Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna.
Mrs. LUNA. I also encourage my colleagues to support this. These
individuals can potentially give the Oversight Committee access to
financial records and potentially name names.
Chairman COMER. Okay. Any other Member seek recognition?
Seeing—okay. Yes, sir.
Mr. MCGUIRE. Yes, I just want to speak to the amendment.
Chairman COMER. Go ahead. Proceed. McGuire.
Mr. MCGUIRE. Just I think we all know in the military it should
be apolitical. If somebody saved your life on the battlefield, you
would not care if they were Black or White, Democrat, Republican,
Independent, male or female. It should be apolitical.
And some people risk their time, some people risk their money,
but our men and women in the military oftentimes risk their life
or give their life for their freedom. And doxxing anyone in the mili-
tary for any reason, it just goes against the founding principles of
this country. It goes against everything that is great about our
country, and it is totally wrong. And we should bring this guy in
and hold him accountable.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
Any other Members seek recognition?
Seeing none, we are going to vote by voice on the Garcia amend-
ment to the Luna motion.
All those in favor of the Garcia amendment, signify by saying
aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, say no.
[No response.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the Garcia amendment to the Luna motion is agreed to.
117
Now, would anyone want to discuss the Luna motion, as amend-
ed?
Mr. GARCIA. I would just like to add, Mr. Chair, that I support
and certainly recommend House Democrats to support the Luna
amendment.
Chairman COMER. Any other Member seek recognition?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the Luna motion, as amended
with the Garcia amendment, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, say no.
[Chorus of noes.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the motion is agreed to.
The Committee will now proceed with the Mace motion to sub-
poena the Department of I will recognize Ms. Mace to explain her
motion.
Ms. MACE. Yes. This is to subpoena the immigration records of
Ilhan Omar and her alleged brother-husband, and another husband
whose names I cannot pronounce. The Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform is the principal oversight Committee of the
U.S. House of Representatives and has broad authority to inves-
tigate any manner at any time under House Rule X.
And this particularly, the legislative thing that this would inform
would identify reforms regarding immigration fraud and
denaturalization processes, potential criminal liability, things that
we need to address statutorily and legislatively, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Chairman COMER. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia to speak on the Mace amend-
ment.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have an amendment
to the motion made by Representative Mace.
Chairman COMER. State your amendment.
Mr. GARCIA. At the end of the motion, I would like to add: Pursu-
ant to clause 2(k)(6) of House Rule XI, the Committee shall sub-
poena all documents and communications from the Department of
Defense regarding the military service record of Representative
Cory Mills of Florida; all documents, communications, and con-
tracts from the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, of
Interior, of Homeland Security and Department of State related to
Representative Cory Mills of Florida; and any business in which he
or any relative has a financial or controlling interest, including
Pacem Defense, Pacem Solutions International LLC, ALS LLC; and
any documents and communications from the Department of Jus-
tice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, Ed
Martin in his personal capacity, and the White House regarding
any communications around the February 2025 domestic violence
incident in Washington, D.C., involving Representative Cory Mills
of Florida.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized to
explain the amendment.
Chairman COMER. Mr. Garcia amended the Mace motion.
Does any other Member seek recognition?
Mr. GARCIA. I would like to just comment on the motion.
118
Chairman COMER. Go ahead.
Ms. MACE. And then if I can comment after.
Chairman COMER. I will recognize Garcia, then Mace. Go ahead.
Mr. GARCIA. I just want to just begin by saying, broadly speak-
ing, on the initial motion, Congresswoman Omar is a proud Mem-
ber of this body and an American and as American as any Member
of this body.
She is a public servant and a fighter for her constituents, and
she represents the American Dream. And I know I, and House
Democrats, are honored and proud to support her and to serve with
her.
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has endured horrific attacks her en-
tire time in public office, and we admire her courage. My motion
requests documents on Cory Mills, a Republican from Florida.
And I just want to note that this is not the best way of handling
these types of issues, and we are introducing this only because this
is being introduced on Representative Ilhan Omar. And so, we are
forced to make this motion and this amendment to Representative
Mace’s, Nancy Mace’s, motion.
So, with that, I conclude.
Chairman COMER. The gentleman yields back.
Now, the Chair recognizes Ms. Mace to speak on the Garcia
amendment to her motion.
Ms. MACE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I support Representa-
tive Garcia’s amendment. And you beat me to it. I was going to do
this on the House Armed Services Committee, and I am a little
jealous that you beat me to it.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. It is the best sunshine. And if
there are individuals, I do not care about party. I do not care about
affiliation. This needs to be getting—we need to get to the bottom
of it and what is going on.
And, quite frankly, I do not think someone that allegedly is doing
arms deals should be sitting on the Foreign Affairs Committee or
the House Armed Services Committee. And if this is what gets to
the bottom of what is happening over there, then I support it and
I support the amendment, and let us do it.
Chairman COMER. Do you yield back? Do you yield to me?
Ms. MACE. I yield back.
Chairman COMER. So, I have had several Members request infor-
mation about trying to determine if Ms. Omar was involved in any
of the Somali fraud and this and that. The thing that I have told
people is the Ethics Committee is set up to do that. That is what
the Ethics Committee’s sole purpose is, is to investigate Members.
So, we have got a motion by Mr. Garcia to amend Ms. Mace’s mo-
tion. Both the amendment and the motion seek this Committee to
investigate sitting Members of Congress. That is not something the
Oversight Committee does, but, you know, we are a democratic
committee and I am not telling anybody in here how to vote. You
vote however you want.
But that is what the Ethics Committee’s role is. That is their ju-
risdiction. And I just wanted to state that. And, again, look, I am
for whatever. I am for transparency. You all vote the way you
want. This Committee is wired, you are going to vote the way you
want anyway.
119
I do not think the Ranking Member can tell his Members how
to vote, and I cannot tell my Members how to vote. I am just telling
you, that is what the Ethics Committee’s sole purpose in life is. So,
I am just stating that.
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, on a point of order.
Chairman COMER. Which one do we want——
Mr. Lynch.
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I believe you are correct in your as-
sessment that that is not something within our jurisdiction. That
would mean that that motion would be out of order, not subject to
a vote and let us do this anyway, even though it is not within our
jurisdiction.
That is a jurisdiction of another committee, and we normally and
regularly refer matters that are not within our jurisdiction to other
committees. And that is how that should be handled, sir. That is
my thought.
Chairman COMER. The previous Chairman of the—I am going to
respond to Mr. Lynch’s inquiry. The previous Chairwoman of the
Committee, from New York—remind me—Maloney, she said the
Oversight Committee has jurisdiction over anything and every-
thing, and I kind of tend to believe that.
But now, the Ethics Committee has primary jurisdiction. There
is no question about that. Now, do we have secondary jurisdiction?
Possibly, probably, whatever. I am not——
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman, under Rule X, we have the ability. We
have full oversight of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Chairman COMER. We can do pretty much what we want in this
Committee, but I just want to make it very clear so we do not start
going down this road or this Committee will just turn into, you
know, investigating other Members, whoever is in control.
That is what the Ethics Committee is set up to do. And I am
not—look, Ms. Mace, you can file any motion you want.
Ms. MACE. If someone beat their wife and it was covered up, you
should find out. If someone married their brother to commit immi-
gration fraud, we should find out. That is what this Committee can
do.
Chairman COMER. I understand.
Mr. GARCIA. Let us not defame Members of Congress. Mr. Chair-
man, I just want to agree, first of all. I think Oversight Democrats,
we do not believe either of these motions should be discussed. This
is not the place to be going after Members in this way. If there is
a concern about a Member, it should be at the Ethics Committee.
But if Members on the Majority are going to go after Members
in our caucus, we are going to do the same. And so, if the Repub-
lican Majority wants to remove this amendment or vote this
amendment down completely, we would join you on that, but what
we are not going to do is allow the attack on one of our Members.
Chairman COMER. And I am not defending or opposing. I am just
saying that is what that Committee is supposed to do.
The Chair recognizes——
Ms. MACE. This is what we do up here. We just protect each
other, protect our own, and nobody ever gets held accountable for
anything up here. This whole thing is BS.
120
Mr. LYNCH. It goes to the Ethics Committee and they will handle
it.
Ms. MACE. Which then it dies in a black hole.
Chairman COMER. We are going to vote on this. Everybody is
going to vote on this. We are going to vote on this because there
has been a motion and an amendment. We are going to vote on the
amendment and the motion. I am just saying that is what the Eth-
ics Committee is supposed to do.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry.
Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
There are few times that myself and Mr. Lynch agree on things.
I think he would admit that as I have. But on this occasion, I feel
he is correct.
And while this Committee may have the jurisdiction to do all
manner of things, I think this is a dangerous precedent to set. The
Ethics Committee is set up specifically for this task.
And I empathize with Representative Mace that it seems like
there is no accountability over and over again. And maybe in the
case of Representative Omar and Representative Mills, I might
even feel that way. But we have a process here for a reason, and
the Ethics Committee is set up the way it is for a reason so that
there is equal representation in a place that is hyper partisan over
the smallest of things.
And so that there is a due process where American citizens, indi-
viduals in this body and serving Members are treated fairly. That
is why we have that committee. And if we are going to run Mem-
bers through a partisan committee, which all the other ones are set
up to be so, I think that that is going to be something that we
might enjoy the outcome of at the moment, but will not enjoy the
outcome at some future time when we are in the Minority.
And so, on this occasion, I agree with Mr. Lynch. And I would
encourage the Chair to render this motion out of order. And with
my remaining time, I would cede some time to Mr. Lynch.
Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman. And he is correct, we do not
agree that often, but I respect the gentleman.
The other piece is this, is that anyone in the public can make an
allegation of any Member here for any reason, political or personal
or otherwise.
And if we are going to debate allegations from the public against
Members on this Committee, then you are just exposed to whatever
anyone throws at you. And all you got to do is spend about one
minute on social media and think about the cruelty and falsity that
can be tossed against any Member.
And then, what the gentlelady is saying is that we want to de-
bate the merits and the veracity of those allegations against us
here in an open committee rather than having it go to the Ethics
Committee, who will be able to vet those allegations, and then if
they are meaningful, bring something before the entire body.
But we open every Member now and in the future to terrible ex-
posure to your reputation if you are going to handle every single
allegation here in open public, regardless of how credible that alle-
gation against a Member might be. I just think it is bad for the
institution and there is another process that has worked in the
past.
121
Thank you. I yield back to the gentleman.
Mr. PERRY. And I yield, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Who has got the floor, Mr. Perry?
Mr. PERRY. I yield.
Chairman COMER. And would you yield to me for a minute?
Mr. PERRY. If you want to engage in a colloquy, absolutely.
Chairman COMER. I do not disagree with what Ms. Mace is try-
ing to do. I do not disagree with what Mr. Garcia is trying to do.
And I do not know—I have no idea what the Ethics Committee is
doing on either of these. But I think it is disappointing that Ms.
Omar was not here for the Minnesota Somalia hearing. I mean,
that is something I think she should have attended. And I think
Mills should, you know, answer questions on the House Floor.
I think they both—there are a lot of questions the American peo-
ple have for both of them. So, I am just saying that is what the
Ethics Committee is for.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Chair, did you just refer to it as a Somalia hear-
ing?
Chairman COMER. Hold on. It was a hearing on Minnesota, fraud
in the welfare system.
Ms. MACE. Somalians committed billions dollars of fraud. It was
a Somali hearing.
Chairman COMER. There was Somali fraud. There was Somalia
fraud. There were lots of Somalia fraud allegations today.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, if we can continue our colloquy, you
are the Chairman of the Committee and you can make a ruling.
Now, we might disagree with the ruling of the Chair, but I would
tell you it is my position and my recommendation, humbly and re-
spectfully, to the Chair that the Chair should render this motion
invalid.
And if we want to challenge the ruling of the Chair, then we can
do that and have a vote on that. But I think this is of substance
enough and import enough that we treat it with the gravity that
Mr. Lynch and others have suggested, not only in this cir-
cumstance, feeling the same way you do and in total honesty, quite
honestly, the same way that Representative Mace does about
whether this has been adjudicated appropriately or timely or what
have you.
The point is, is this the place, is this the process, to do those
things? And I would agree with my colleagues on either side of the
aisle that this is not the place to do what is being implied here in
this motion. And with that——
Chairman COMER. And to answer your question on the ruling of
the Chair, you can ask the question. That was what Mr. Lynch
started with. We can vote on whatever we want. In consulting with
the parliamentarian, we can vote for this. We can do this. I am just
saying that that is what the Ethics Committee is for.
Mr. PERRY. I understand.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia, then——
Mr. GARCIA. I think we may have—I understand—first, I want
to also, I am associating myself with the comments that were just
made, and particularly with Representative Lynch.
122
I think, again, this is not the appropriate place for this, and we
have filed a substitute motion because of the main motion that was
filed.
What I would like to do at this time is I am going to withdraw
my motion, and instead, do a motion to table the Mace motion. And
if that motion does not pass successfully, then I will bring my sub-
stitute motion on Representative Mills back to the floor.
But now we have an opportunity with this additional amend-
ment, I am withdrawing the Mills amendment, and my new motion
amendment is to table the initial Mace motion.
I hope everyone votes yes on that. I think that solves the issues
that a majority of us are trying to solve, and we can move on to
the next item. So, that is the new motion.
Chairman COMER. So, Mr. Garcia made a motion to table. That
is not debatable.
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, I do have a question.
Chairman COMER. It is not debatable. I am sorry. But state your
request. You are a good Member, Mr. Palmer.
Mr. PALMER. I just have a question and——
Chairman COMER. Do it quick because it is not debatable, but
anyway, go ahead.
Mr. PALMER. It is not about the motion to table. It is about under
the Ethics Committee, if they find evidence against a Member, they
can make recommendations for censure, for removal.
If we were to conduct something like that here, what power does
this Committee have? Is it the same power as the Ethics Com-
mittee? I really—I agree with Mr. Perry and Mr. Lynch that this
might be a bridge too far. And if we are going to do this, then we
need to know what the consequences are going forward for any
other Member who might, including a Member of this Committee,
who might have issues raised.
How far does this go other than just, you know, a public trial?
I yield back.
Chairman COMER. All right. So, all those in favor of the motion
to table signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, say no.
[Chorus of noes.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the motion to table is agreed to.
Is there any other business which needs to come before the Com-
mittee? The Chair recognizes Mr. Higgins and then we will recog-
nize Ms. Pressley.
Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, I had sought recognition.
Chairman COMER. Go ahead. You are recognized.
Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, I had endeavored to remain silent,
but I am compelled to clarify for the citizenry watching and remind
my colleagues.
Let me just ask you, Mr. Chairman, you are Chairman of the
Oversight Committee. Does this Committee enjoy and do you pos-
sess the power to subpoena?
Chairman COMER. Yes, sir.
123
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you very much. Does that authority to sub-
poena require a vote by this entire Committee or debate regarding
votes for a subpoena of material or——
Chairman COMER. No.
Mr. HIGGINS [continuing]. People?
Chairman COMER. No.
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you. So we are a serious investigative com-
mittee body, and yet, we are presenting to the American people the
concept that this is our subpoena procedure, that a Member has to
present a motion and there has to be a vote and absurd debate
back and forth, that this is the means by which we determine
whether or not a subpoena is issued in the Oversight Committee?
I think it is insulting to the seriousness of the work that we do
and that the staff of this Committee performs every day. Every
day.
And seeking a subpoena, might I add, let me just put this out
there, it is a furtherance of compulsion. Listen to your Uncle Clay,
America. You do not just normally start out with a subpoena intro-
duced as a vote by a Member on a guy. This poor guy, Seth Harp,
I do not know who he is. I had to Google him.
We have not reached out to him and asked him to come before
this Committee and he said no. That is normally the first step. You
call and email. You have an official communication from the Com-
mittee reaching out to an American citizen, say, we would like to
talk to you. As part of our legislative purpose, we are conducting
investigative work. You are included. Will you come talk to us?
Then if they say no, you take the next step, which is usually a
more strongly worded letter. And then you get to the point where
you can rightfully use your subpoena authority in a judicious and
conservative manner.
And yet, because of the behavior of this Committee in recent
months, it has been presented to the American people via C-SPAN
that the way we pursue a subpoena in this Committee is by the
introduction of a motion for a vote to subpoena something or some-
one. That is not the way it is done.
Mr. Chairman, I am voting no on all of this, because I object to
this process that is false and not reflective of the serious investiga-
tive work that the Oversight Committee performs day in and day
out.
And I yield to the Chairman.
Chairman COMER. Thank you. Thank you, Clay, very well said.
Very well said.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Pressley.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My motion to subpoena is pretty straightforward. It is timely and
also germane. It is the only subpoena that is relevant to today’s
hearing.
Earlier today, a woman was shot multiple times and killed by
immigration enforcement agents in Minnesota while we were hold-
ing a hearing on the state. And while there are claims that ICE
did nothing wrong, the officials in Minnesota say otherwise. And
since this Committee is responsible for oversight of Federal law en-
forcement, we must investigate.
124
This subpoena will help us get to the truth, and it should have
bipartisan support and I urge my colleagues to vote yes.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady yields back.
Any other Member seek recognition on the Pressley motion?
Mr. GARCIA. Yes.
Chairman COMER. Who said—do we have anybody on our side?
Okay, Mr. Ranking Member. And then I will go to——
Mr. GARCIA. I will actually—I just want to add that I obviously
support the Pressley motion. I think it is relevant to today’s con-
versation, so I want to thank her for the motion.
I want to yield the rest of my time to Congressman
Krishnamoorthi, please.
Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. I just wanted to give a little context to
Ms. Pressley’s excellent motion for those who have not had a
chance to see this video.
This video from Minnesota is deeply, deeply disturbing. It shows
a Federal immigration enforcement operation on a residential
street in south Minneapolis where families live. Agents move in on
a civilian vehicle. Weapons are drawn. The car is boxed in. Shots
are fired. A woman is struck and dies. And if you look at the video,
you can see that the officer actually shoots the woman point-blank
in front of the windshield.
The footage does not show an unavoidable imminent threat or
that lethal force was the only option. From what can be seen, the
woman was trying to drive away. That raises serious questions
about judgment and deescalation.
A woman is dead. Her family now carries a permanent loss. This
should never have happened. When Federal agents use deadly
force, the burden of justification is extraordinarily high, regardless
of the mission.
Oversight requires sworn testimony. Secretary of Homeland Se-
curity, Kristi Noem, must appear before this Committee. I will
press to subpoena Secretary Noem and force a vote again and
again until she explains on the record why a woman is dead fol-
lowing a Federal operation captured on video in a residential
neighborhood.
If Secretary Noem has nothing to hide, she should have nothing
to fear from testifying before this Committee. I hope she will come
before this Committee voluntarily. This Committee must do its
duty. Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman COMER. Yield back. Any other Member seek recogni-
tion?
Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COMER. The Chair recognizes Mr. Gosar, and then I
will get to Clay.
Mr. GOSAR. Yes. You know, I think the air of what the gentleman
is talking about is good, but I think it has to be across the board.
And what I mean by that is that there were instigating factors by
the mayor that antagonized the situation.
And anybody that—if it was found that there is innocence here,
then we should presume everybody is innocent until proven guilty,
that they also are on the line, that if they combatively took on the
police or the—not the police, but the folks from immigration—they
125
should be charged as well. So, I think it should be open all the way
across the board so that it is equal and adjudicated.
Chairman COMER. Do you yield to Mr. Higgins? Would you yield
to Mr. Higgins?
Mr. GOSAR. Yes.
Chairman COMER. Go ahead.
Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you. I thank my colleague.
Mr. Chairman, the split-second decisions that an officer has to
make on the street and—everything is on the line, literally.
And whereas I fully support a thorough investigation of this offi-
cer-involved shooting and every officer-involved shooting, I ask my
colleagues to back up from this request, and I am going to oppose
this motion but, actually, I think it should be withdrawn, because
I ask that my colleagues look at this motion within the context of
what you are actually asking for.
You are asking for a slice of evidence void of the full spectrum
of the required investigation. This is the sort of thing that we
should absolutely, as a Republic well-rooted in criminal justice pro-
cedure over the course of 250 years of learning and growing and
developing as a Nation regarding the protection of the innocent,
which is every American accused of a crime until proven guilty.
And the process for investigation should be thorough and slow
and calm. And here we are again. We are leaning toward ‘‘show me
the video.’’
Ms. ANSARI. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. PRESSLEY. Would the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. HIGGINS. And I will close by saying—I am going to yield my
time back to Mr. Gosar, but I will close with the time that has been
yielded to me by saying, maybe I am the only guy in here that has
brought——
Ms. ANSARI. Would you yield for a question, Mr. Higgins?
Mr. HIGGINS. No, madam. The time was yielded to me. You can
be recognized. When you are recognized, you can ask me the ques-
tion. I am happy to answer.
Ms. ANSARI. Okay.
Mr. HIGGINS. Maybe I am the only guy in here that has brought
many people in the back of my squad car to jail to be booked for
the initial arrest. It was not uncommon,—hear me, my colleagues.
It was not uncommon from the back seat of my unit, they would
say, show me the video, man. Show me the proof, man. And I
would say, sir, this is the arrest part. Later comes the trial part,
and you will have a shot to look at all the evidence that the pros-
ecution has.
So, we are falling into that category of being too quick and cute
for our own good here. We should allow the investigative authority
under thorough and complete and vigorous oversight by Congress,
yes, but not to the extent that we are interfering with the inves-
tigative authority by voting and mandating that evidence of an in-
vestigation, a small slice of it be presented for public review. We
should be calm and judicious.
And I yield the time that was kindly yielded to me back to Mr.
Gosar.
Mr. GOSAR. I thank the gentleman. And I move to table the mo-
tion.
126
Ms. ANSARI. Mr. Chairman, can I speak on the motion?
Chairman COMER. Not debatable. Motion has been made by Mr.
Gosar of tabling the Pressley motion.
All those in favor of tabling, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman COMER. All those opposed, no.
[Chorus of noes.]
Chairman COMER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it
and the motion to table is agreed to.
Mr. GARCIA. Can we get a recorded vote on this?
Chairman COMER. A recorded vote has been ordered. The clerk
will call the role.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
Mr. JORDAN. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. GOSAR. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
Mr. GROTHMAN. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. CLOUD. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. PALMER. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes yes.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. HIGGINS. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. SESSIONS. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes yes.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. BIGGS. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. MACE. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes no.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. FALLON. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Perry?
Mr. PERRY. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes aye.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. TIMMONS. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes aye.
127
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. BURCHETT. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Boebert?
Ms. BOEBERT. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison?
Mr. BURLISON. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Crane?
Mr. CRANE. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Crane votes aye.
Mr. Jack?
Mr. JACK. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Jack votes aye.
Mr. McGuire?
Mr. MCGUIRE. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. McGuire votes aye.
Mr. Gill?
Mr. GILL. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Gill votes aye.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. GARCIA. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. NORTON. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. LYNCH. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Mr. Khanna?
Mr. KHANNA. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Khanna votes no.
Mr. Mfume?
Mr. MFUME. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Brown?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. STANSBURY. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. FROST. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. LEE. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
128
Mr. Casar?
Mr. CASAR. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. CROCKETT. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Ms. Randall?
Ms. RANDALL. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Randall votes no.
Mr. Subramanyam?
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Subramanyam votes no.
Ms. Ansari?
Ms. ANSARI. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ansari votes no.
Mr. Bell?
Mr. BELL. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes no.
Ms. Simon?
Ms. SIMON. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Simon votes no.
Mr. Min?
Mr. MIN. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Min votes no.
Mr. Walkinshaw?
Mr. WALKINSHAW. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Walkinshaw votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. PRESSLEY. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. TLAIB. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Chairman COMER. Has any Member not voted or any Member
wish to change your vote?
Seeing none, will the clerk tally the votes?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 19, the nays
are 21.
Chairman COMER. The motion to table fails. And we will proceed
to, I assume, vote, unless people want to debate this more.
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chair?
Chairman COMER. Any other Member seek recognition?
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair?
Chairman COMER. Mr. Fallon, go ahead.
Mr. FALLON. Chairman, I will be very brief because it has been
a long day for all of us. Listen, I am all for transparency. This inci-
dent, as the Member from Massachusetts said, this incident just
happened today. I would like to give DHS a chance to release any-
thing related to this. This is a very serious matter. I have only seen
one video myself. I have heard that there are other angles. So, I
would like to see the process play out.
129
And this is—I think this is out of order and it is not our role.
So, I agree, yes, that we need to learn the truth and see all the
evidence, but I am going to trust the process.
And I yield back.
Ms. MACE. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. Do you yield to Ms. Mace?
Mr. FALLON. Yes, I yield to Ms. Mace.
Ms. MACE. And I will be fairly quick. I support the subpoena.
After the first two videos went viral, there is a third video that ap-
peared to show the ICE agent being struck by the vehicle. My un-
derstanding, he is in the hospital now. And so, I think getting it
out there on what happened—again, sunlight is the best disinfect-
ant.
But I also want to recognize, as I am supporting this subpoena,
why this happened. Why we are here today is because, for years
now, ICE agents, police officers, conservatives, Republicans, have
been dehumanized. ICE agents have been called Nazis, fascists.
Today, we heard the Governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, literally try
to incite violence and a riot and war against the Federal Govern-
ment today. You heard the Mayor of Minneapolis drop the ‘‘F’’
bomb.
And so, when I hear my colleagues across the other side of the
aisle talk about judgment and deescalation, we are the ones that
have been judged. ICE officers have been judged. The deescalation
is not happening. This violent rhetoric is causing violence, and peo-
ple feel emboldened to be violent.
The other thing I want to mention is that today Kristi Noem—
bring her to the Committee. I support that. She did address this
today, what happened in public. It was one of the first things she
talked about this afternoon, right after it happened, I believe with-
in an hour or two. She very publicly provided an answer that was
very clear and detailed on what happened and why.
But I would encourage everyone to think about why we are here
today. I mean, and this kind of rhetoric has just got to stop. But
release it all. Release all the camera footage, body cam. I am all
for it, and I will be voting for it.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman COMER. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair recog——
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. Okay. We will recognize Ranking Member,
then we will go to Burchett.
Mr. GARCIA. Thank you.
No, I was just going to say that obviously the motion to table did
not go through, and Oversight Democrats are ready to vote on the
motion.
Chairman COMER. Burchett.
Mr. BURCHETT. Point of clarification. What exactly are we voting
on?
Chairman COMER. We are voting on a motion to subpoena—a
Pressley motion to subpoena the Department of Homeland Security
for all documents and footage related to the murder of a woman by
ICE in Minneapolis, Minnesota, today.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify that word.
130
Chairman COMER. Go ahead.
Mr. TIMMONS. The ‘‘death’’ of a woman.
Chairman COMER. Well, it says ‘‘murder’’ on the motion.
Mr. TIMMONS. Okay. Well.
Ms. CROCKETT. And, Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair?
Chairman COMER. Question.
Ms. CROCKETT. Mr. Chair, I just want to be clear, because I am
not sure if it is stated in the motion and you failed to read it, but
I would like the record to reflect that the woman who was killed,
her name is Renee Nicole Good, so that hopefully we will not have
any confusion about——
Chairman COMER. It is not in the motion. But question has been
called for. We are going to vote on this.
The clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
Mr. JORDAN. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes no.
Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. GOSAR. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes no.
Ms. Foxx?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
Mr. GROTHMAN. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes no.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. CLOUD. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes no.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. PALMER. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes no.
Mr. Higgins? Mr. Higgins?
Mr. HIGGINS. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes no.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. SESSIONS. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes no.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. BIGGS. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes no.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. MACE. I did not realize it said ‘‘murder.’’ I am a no. This was
not murder.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes no.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. FALLON. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes nay.
Mr. Donalds?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Perry?
Mr. PERRY. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes no.
131
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. TIMMONS. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes no.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. BURCHETT. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes no.
Ms. Boebert?
Ms. BOEBERT. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes no.
Mrs. Luna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison?
Mr. BURLISON. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes no.
Mr. Crane?
Mr. CRANE. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Crane votes no.
Mr. Jack?
Mr. JACK. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Jack votes no.
Mr. McGuire?
Mr. MCGUIRE. No.
The Clerk. Mr. McGuire votes no.
Mr. Gill?
Mr. GILL. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gill votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. GARCIA. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes yes.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. NORTON. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes yes.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. LYNCH. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes yes.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes yes.
Mr. Khanna?
Mr. KHANNA. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Khanna votes yes.
Mr. Mfume?
Mr. MFUME. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes yes.
Ms. Brown?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. STANSBURY. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes yes.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. FROST. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes yes.
132
Ms. Lee?
Ms. LEE. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes yes.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. CASAR. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes yes.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. CROCKETT. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes yes.
Ms. Randall?
Ms. RANDALL. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Randall votes yes.
Mr. Subramanyam?
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Subramanyam votes yes.
Ms. Ansari?
Ms. ANSARI. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Ansari votes yes.
Mr. Bell?
Mr. BELL. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes yes.
Ms. Simon?
Ms. SIMON. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Simon votes yes.
Mr. Min?
Mr. MIN. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Min votes yes.
Mr. Walkinshaw?
Mr. WALKINSHAW. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Walkinshaw votes yes.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. PRESSLEY. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes yes.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. TLAIB. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes yes.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman COMER. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes no.
Chairman COMER. Has any other Member—does any other Mem-
ber wish to vote? If not, any Member wish to change your vote?
Seeing none, the clerk will tally the vote.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 20, the nays
are 20.
Chairman COMER. It is a tie, so the motion fails.
Does any other Member have any business before the Com-
mittee?
Seeing none, with that and without objection, all Members have
five legislative days within which to submit materials and addi-
tional written questions for the witnesses which will be forwarded
to the witnesses.
133
If there is no further business, without objection, the Committee
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 6:39 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
Æ
File and source
- File
- CHRG-119hhrg62434.pdf
- Size
- 410,574 bytes
- SHA-256
- 05c9192292d0824a8d4e3b0c4920dc296a96f503a0246c946ea2f6979e3e92d4
- Our copy
- CHRG-119hhrg62434.pdf
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov