The real villains aren’t in the movies. They’re looting America’s welfare system.



Somali pirates. Dead people “billing” taxpayers. Foreign terror networks thriving on Medicaid scams. Hackers stealing identities to collect benefits.

That lineup sounds like an over-the-top Hollywood heist movie. Americans now read versions of it on the front page.

Americans should treat this caper as a wake-up call. Elected leaders should treat it as an emergency.

Federal prosecutors charged 78 Somali immigrants with allegedly stealing more than $1 billion from taxpayers. National outlets noticed, including the see-no-immigrant-evil New York Times. Prosecutors also say suspected Medicaid fraud in Minnesota may top $9 billion, with new allegations and evidence surfacing by the day.

Hollywood can’t compete with numbers like that. In “Die Hard,” the crooks chased $640 million. Danny Ocean’s crew in “Ocean’s 11” made off with a mere $160 million. Minnesota’s real-life scammers allegedly went after far more, and they exploited programs meant to help the vulnerable.

Americans should treat this caper as a wake-up call. Elected leaders should treat it as an emergency: Prosecute the thieves, close the loopholes, and change the incentives that let fraudsters treat public benefits like an ATM.

For perspective, the fraud under investigation approaches the size of Somalia’s entire government budget and equals roughly 12% of Somalia’s economy, based on recent estimates. Minnesota’s Somali population equals about 0.5% of Somalia’s population and about 2.5% of the Twin Cities metro. Yet prosecutors say a small number of people allegedly moved sums that rival major industries back home.

Worse, investigators say some stolen money went overseas. In the Feeding Our Future case and related investigations, federal prosecutors have alleged that some proceeds flowed to al-Shabaab, a terrorist group the United States has targeted for years. If those allegations hold, taxpayers didn’t just fund fraud. They helped bankroll an enemy.

Minnesota’s scandal also exposes a national contradiction. Washington wages war abroad, welcomes refugees at home, and writes checks through the same federal programs that criminals can exploit — while the national debt nears $39 trillion.

Minnesota’s political class added its own layer of absurdity. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D) built a profitable career calling America racist. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) delivered his re-election victory speech in Somali just days before the scope of these cases made headlines. Symbolic gestures came easy. Basic oversight did not.

Gov. Tim Walz (D) still owes voters answers. Did incompetence drive this disaster, or did indifference do the work? Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem argues both played a role. Reports now suggest state employees blew the whistle years ago about lax controls and sloppy management. Voters heard little of it when elections still hung in the balance.

RELATED: Trump has the chance to end the welfare free-for-all Minnesota exposed

Photo by: Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Walz reportedly knew about major fraud risks as early as 2020. His administration later resumed funding after recipients sued, accusing the state of racism. The Walz administration also handed an “outstanding refugee award” in 2021 to a woman now charged in connection with fraud — facts that undercut today’s alibis.

Federal investigators deserve credit. The Departments of Justice and Treasury have pursued these cases aggressively. House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has opened another congressional probe. Prosecutions matter, but prevention matters more.

A new law President Trump signed this summer aims to make fraud more difficult to pull off. It requires states to recheck eligibility for able-bodied adults on Medicaid every six months instead of annually. For the first time, it also forces states to absorb more of the cost when they let fraud run rampant.

Those reforms should move quickly from paper to practice. States, red and blue, should implement them immediately. Fraudsters thrive on delay, confusion, and political excuses.

Taxpayer fraud deserves full prosecution. Political leaders who enable it deserve accountability too — whether they turned a blind eye, ignored whistleblowers, or refused to enforce the law. Every state in the Union should move now, or Minnesota’s scandal will spread.

19 Republicans Vote Against Stripping $5 Billion In Refugee Welfare Out Of Funding Package

The Senate rejected an amendment Friday that would strip $5.1 billion in refugee welfare spending out of a government funding package in a vote of 32-67. The vote split Republicans with 32 GOP senators supporting the measure and 19 voting “no”. All Democrats opposed the amendment, which was offered by Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul. […]

Senate bill would give nearly $6 billion to refugee programs despite record-low intake numbers



An appropriations bill could allocate billions in funding to refugee programs after temporary government funding expires.

Congress passed a clean funding extension in November 2025 that expires on January 30, 2026, when new funding allocation could take place.

'These programs provide a variety of benefits and services to refugees, asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants.'

This possibility has conservatives pointing out issues with legislation like a Senate appropriations bill, first proposed in July, for fiscal year 2026.

The bill, which allocates funding for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and "related agencies," has garnered significant attention from online researchers regarding its allocation of funds to refugee programs.

"Hey guys, all those insane 'refugee assistance' grants I'm always tweeting? The [GOP] is about to supercharge the funds," wrote Oilfield Rando, an X account with more than 235,000 followers.

RELATED: Warlord, terror, and taxpayer theft: Somali scheme allegedly bilks millions from Maine Medicaid to fund foreign army

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Particularly, conservatives online have taken issue with the bill's recommendations for "Refugee and Entrant Assistance," for which the committee recommends $5.691 billion.

"These programs provide a variety of benefits and services to refugees, asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, immigrants arriving on Special Immigrant Visas [SIV], trafficking victims, and torture victims," the bill reads.

A whopping $564 million of those funds is recommended for "Transitional and Medical Services," while providing grants to states and "nonprofit organizations to provide cash and medical assistance to arriving refugees, as well as foster care services to unaccompanied minors."

More than $300 million is recommended for "Refugee Support Services."

The Senate committee argued in the document that HHS needs to ensure funding for resettlement agencies so that they can maintain their infrastructure and capacity at a level to continue to serve "new refugees, previously arrived refugees," and others who are eligible for "integration services."

RELATED: 'Rents will come down' — but not in sanctuary cities: Loan agent chronicles homes apparently abandoned by illegal aliens

Photo by Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

According to the Baker Institute, the Trump administration set the refugee cap at 7,500 for fiscal year 2026, the lowest in U.S. history. This is reportedly a 94% reduction from the 125,000 cap that the Biden administration set for FY 2025.

President Trump famously admitted 59 South African refugees into the United States in May; however, there have been no other major intakes by the administration over the course of 2025.

The Senate Committee on Appropriations is majority Republican, with 15 Republicans and 14 Democrats.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

It’s Morally Righteous, Not Bigotry To Notice All Cultures Are Not Equally Good

Multiculturalism has created a rigid standard of moral relativism that insists every culture is equal, no matter how it may violate the most basic principles of liberty or life.

Settling Afghans here puts America last



I have a longtime friend — I’ll omit his name because he is somewhat politically prominent — who has been very involved in the extraction of Afghans who allegedly helped us from Afghanistan and resettlement of them in the United States. My friend already has a demanding job, but he has often worked through the night, forgoing sleep to help with this task.

I have several strong political disagreements with him, but I would never question his patriotism. He voluntarily served as a soldier in Afghanistan after overcoming great obstacles to be accepted into the military. But I would strongly question his political judgment and the judgment of anyone who thinks we should be settling Afghan refugees in America.

'The second the US military backed out, their men folded and refused to fight for what we gave them. We don’t owe them, they owe us.'

Unfortunately, a number of our former soldiers, no matter how sincere their beliefs, seem to sympathize more with people in a foreign country whom they believed, rightly or wrongly, to be allies rather than with the interests of the only country to which they owe their allegiance.

Joe Kent, an Afghanistan combat veteran and director of the National Counterterrorism Center, argued on social media for the deportation of all of our “Afghan allies.”

“Vetting a foreigner in a war zone to determine if he will fight a common enemy is vastly different than vetting a foreigner to see if he is suitable to live in our country,” Kent wrote.

As journalist Daniel Greenfield notes, the targeted attack on two National Guardsmen by an Afghan national in Washington, D.C., the day before Thanksgiving was not a one-off. It’s part of an extensive series of assaults by Afghans whom we have foolishly allowed to resettle in the United States.

Unbridgeable inequalities

Having lived briefly in a third-world country and having traveled for many years in various countries of that description, I have quickly learned to be wary of “friendships.” It is not that people in these countries are inherently bad or incapable of genuine friendship in principle. It is that the gap between you (a well-off American) and them (a third-world citizen who, even if relatively affluent, is often at a huge disadvantage versus an American) is astronomical.

And that gap is not just financial and legal, but also based on traditions and customs. Relationships that may feel like genuine friendship for a time usually come with future requests or pleas for assistance. Again, I don’t necessarily blame these people — I might do the same in their shoes — and of course genuine friendships in such situations are possible, but they are far rarer than idealists might wish them to be.

What applies in basically peaceful third-world countries applies a thousandfold in an impoverished, war-torn, and primitive country like Afghanistan. It is monstrously arrogant to think the American political class understands deeply the inner workings of these countries and the motivations of the people there, given that we spent almost $1 trillion to occupy Afghanistan, only to see all of our efforts collapse within a week after we removed our military as a threat of force.

Wade Miller, the executive director of Citizens for Renewing America and a U.S. Marine combat veteran, responded to the claim that resettling Afghans was the moral thing to do since they “fought alongside our own” soldiers, rightly calling it a “BS metric.” As he noted, “1. Many played both sides. 2. Many only did it to make money. 3. Many were plants. 4. Many had long-standing tribal grudges against the Taliban.”

And none of them necessarily has a long-term loyalty to America, which is the first step to assess before even beginning to consider a claim of residency.

All of this would be obvious to anyone who does not let suicidal empathy overwhelm good sense. But unfortunately, we have lost that common sense, even among many of our supposedly hardened fighting forces.

‘We don’t owe them’

Miller punctures the lie that we owe these Afghans for “doing America a favor,” pointing out that we did them a favor by expending American lives and treasure to help them govern themselves without the Taliban. But “the second the U.S. military backed out, their men folded and refused to fight for what we gave them. We don’t owe them, they owe us.”

This is a harsh assessment, but in the aggregate, it is not unfair.

Or consider what Mark Lucas, an Afghanistan veteran and founder of the Article III Project, has written: “Afghans were untrustworthy allies who sold their children to pedophiles, ritually raped little boys, and beat their women.” He notes that without male soldiers guarding them, countless local Afghans made clear that they would have raped the women who were attached to their detachment.

RELATED: Trump makes America dangerous again — to our enemies

Jim Watson/Getty Images

Lucas points out that even asking simple questions of potential Afghan asylum-seekers, such as whether they support putting apostates to death, child marriage, Sharia for non-Muslims, defense of suicide bombings, polygamy, and honor killings, would quickly disqualify them. The vast majority of Afghans, he says, support one or more of these views — none of which are compatible with the American way of life.

One of the few Afghan refugees who resettled in my own state of Montana promptly raped a Montanan shortly after his arrival. Unsurprisingly, the crime and its implications were shamefully underreported by local media.

Toward a more sober policy

Even assuming we have an obligation to those we believed helped us in Afghanistan, it would mean we were obligated to get them to safety — not get them to America. If we had made it clear at the outset that relocating to America was not on offer, we would have see a drastic reduction in the number of “refugees.” We can and should resettle them in other countries. Making arrangements to do that is a worthy use of American soft power.

The notion that resettling Afghans in America is a moral duty reflects Joe Biden’s poor political leadership. His administration and previous ones before it had become arrogant about their ability to control events and remake complex societies and peoples far different from our own. In reality, their policies promoted cultural arrogance under the guise of friendship. They abandoned our own in favor of those from distant cultures and lands.

Let us hope that President Trump’s promise to refuse all new Afghan visas and to remove postwar arrivals and resettle them elsewhere is the start of a more sober, realistic, and serious refugee policy that will put the interests of America and its citizens first.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

Claims Afghans Were ‘Vetted’ Contradict Federal Investigations And Common Sense

The process by which the Biden administration ushered Afghans into the United States barely resembles 'vetting' at all.

SHOCK: Trump administration finds Biden policies let in terrorists, including ISIS plotters



The Trump administration is set to conduct a review of the over 185,000 refugees imported by the Biden administration — especially those imported from terrorism hot spots such as Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, and Venezuela.

This initiative, which is aimed at keeping America safe, has liberals at various NGOs throwing fits.

'I don't want that person in my country.'

According to a Nov. 21 memo outlining the plan reviewed by Reuters, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will undertake a review and "re-interview of all refugees admitted from January 20, 2021, to February 20, 2025," having determined that the previous administration prioritized expediency, quantity, and admissions over quality interviews and proper vetting.

Foreign nationals found not to meet refugee criteria will lose their status, says the memo.

The memo, which was signed by USCIS Director Joe Edlow, also orders a pause on the processing of permanent residence applications for refugees who entered under former President Joe Biden.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to Blaze News, "For four straight years, the Biden administration accelerated refugee admissions from terror- and gang-prone countries, prioritizing sheer numbers over rigorous vetting and strict adherence to legal requirements. This reckless approach undermined the integrity of our immigration system and jeopardized the safety and security of the American people."

"Corrective action is now being taken to ensure those who are present in the United States deserve to be here," added McLaughlin.

RELATED: 'Begin repatriating': German chancellor admits it's time to give Syrian migrants the boot

Photo by ARMEND NIMANI/AFP via Getty Images

Upon retaking office, President Donald Trump paused the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, halting the potential admission of hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals, noting in the corresponding executive order that "the United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees."

This caused consternation among activists and the liberal media, who had evidently grown accustomed to having the floodgates open to the third world.

In fiscal year 2023, the Biden administration admitted 60,014 refugees from 75 countries. Foreign nationals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Afghanistan, and Burma made up two-thirds of the total admissions.

The Biden State Department brought in over 100,000 refugees in fiscal year 2024 and had projected to admit over 125,000 refugees as well as "531,500 other arrivals in FY 2025, the majority of whom are expected to arrive as Cuban and Haitian Entrants through lawful pathways."

Trump was one of many critics who raised concerns in recent years about whether the Biden administration had done a proper job vetting many of the refugees, particularly those from Afghanistan.

Clearly, some radicals made it over.

In January, for instance, Gul Nabi Rahmati, an Afghan refugee who settled in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, allegedly stabbed a caseworker helping refugees. Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard indicated that the motive might have had something to do with religion. Rahmati's attempted murder trial will commence in early 2026.

Rahmati was not the only bad egg former President Joe Biden brought into the U.S.

Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, a 27-year-old Afghan citizen living in Oklahoma City, was arrested after the Justice Department foiled his "plot to acquire semiautomatic weapons and commit a violent attack in the name of ISIS on U.S. soil on Election Day," former Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement in early October.

Tawhedi pleaded guilty to two terrorism offenses in June. His 19-year-old co-conspirator, another Afghan refugee, was sentenced last week to 15 years in federal prison for his role in the foiled terrorist plot.

RELATED: Virginia high-school principal allegedly suggests anti-ICE 'hunting' plot; brother brags about 'assault rifle,' cop claims

Karl Merton Ferron/Baltimore Sun Staff

"Zada was welcomed into the United States and provided with all the opportunities available to residents of our nation, yet he chose to embrace terrorism and plot an ISIS-inspired attack on Election Day," said John Eisenberg, assistant attorney general for national security.

Vice President JD Vance said in a January interview with CBS News' Margaret Brennan, "Now that we know that we have vetting problems with a lot of these refugee programs, we absolutely cannot unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country."

When pressed on whether some refugees were actually being radicalized once in the U.S., Vance said, "I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country, and I think most Americans agree with me."

'It would re-traumatize tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees.'

The news of the Trump administration's new initiative to ensure that decisions made and persons imported by the previous administration — individuals like Zada or Tawhedi — aren't endangering Americans today caused apoplexy among NGOs in the space.

Sharif Aly, president of the International Refugee Assistance Project, claimed that the refugees who entered the U.S. under the USRAP "are already the most highly vetted immigrants in the United States" and characterized the proposed review as "an insult to refugees."

"This order is one more in a long line of efforts to bully some of the most vulnerable members of our communities, by threatening their lawful status, rendering them vulnerable to the egregious conduct of immigration enforcement agencies, and putting them through an onerous and potentially re-traumatizing process," said Aly.

Aly, the former CEO of Islamic Relief USA, suggested further that "besides the enormous cruelty of this undertaking, it would also be a tremendous waste of government resources."

"This plan is shockingly ill-conceived," Naomi Steinberg, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society vice president of U.S. policy and advocacy, said in a statement.

"It would re-traumatize tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees who already went through years of security vetting prior to stepping on U.S. soil," continued Steinberg. "This is a new low in the administration's consistently cold-hearted treatment of people who are already building new lives and enriching the communities where they have made their homes."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Israel Enters Talks With Third Countries Over Trump’s Gaza Emigration Plan

TEL AVIV—Israel began talks on Monday with third countries about taking in Gazans under a mass emigration plan first proposed by President Donald Trump, three people familiar with the matter told the Washington Free Beacon.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and top aide Ron Dermer briefed fellow ministers on the plan during a Monday closed-door cabinet meeting. The goal of the talks, which are expected to continue in the coming days, is to secure commitments by the third countries to accept specific numbers of Gazan migrants. The sources did not know the identities of the countries or what Israel or the United States were offering in return.

"This is big," said one of the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press about the matter. "The immigration plan is moving ahead, and it sounds pretty serious."

The post Israel Enters Talks With Third Countries Over Trump’s Gaza Emigration Plan appeared first on .

Legacy Media Turns On Waterworks For Another Criminal Migrant

'The legacy media must be hard-pressed for sob stories.'