Le Journal

Massive Fraud Infuriates Minnesotans, Lawmakers, But Top Official Sees No Quick Fix Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), ST. PAUL, Minn.—Erin Campbell, Minnesota’s top financial officer, told a state anti-fraud committee at the state Capitol on Jan. 21: “Unfortunately, there’s not a ‘silver bullet’ to stop the type of fraud that we’ve seen in our public-assistance programs.” Minnesota state Rep. Isaac Schultz, a Republican, speaks at a meeting of the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 21, 2026. Janice Hisle/The Epoch Times The lack of a quick fix is largely because “state government is about as complex as it gets,” Campbell told the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee. That bipartisan committee of eight state representatives began meeting nearly a year ago to tackle large-scale defrauding of the state’s public-assistance programs. That was about 10 months before investigative reports and a viral video drew focus to Minnesota’s massive problem with fraudsters. The scandal has been building for years. Since 2022, federal prosecutors have charged nearly 100 suspects—mostly of Somali descent—in Minnesota fraud cases; officials estimate that fraud losses, now being probed as far back as 2018, could exceed $9 billion. President Donald Trump’s administration froze funding for some programs and mobilized investigations from multiple federal agencies, ranging from the Treasury Department to the IRS and the Justice Department. Campbell, commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, told the lawmakers’ committee that her employees “work as hard as we can to support agencies” that are expected to follow the “systems of financial management” that her office creates. Those systems involve “statutes, processes, policies, culture, agencies, practices, and [information technology] ... that have been developed over decades,” she said. Thus, addressing fraud requires “layers” of coordinated changes, she said, such as analyzing data, upgrading technology, and changing state laws that govern program eligibility. Erin Campbell, Minnesota Management and Budget commissioner, fields questions from lawmakers at a meeting of the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 21, 2026. Janice Hisle/The Epoch Times However, noting that the state government has swelled to 59,000 employees, state Rep. Isaac Schultz said: “This is outrageous for the people of Minnesota, that our state government, at its largest size in state history, can’t take care of this mess.” “I can’t understate it—how frustrated Minnesotans are right now with the level of fraud and the lack of accountability that we’ve seen,” he said. Campbell said that 75 employees on her team face the gargantuan task of supporting the statewide government, with its $65-billion budget and hundreds of state agencies, boards, and commissions, “while we’re making 2.5 million payments every year.” Thus, Campbell said, her office lacks “the capacity ... or the appropriate line of sight” to identify and tackle fraud in individual state agencies. When other state agencies see signs of fraud, it’s up to them to pause payments and refer cases to law enforcement agencies or the state attorney general for criminal investigations, Campbell said. Her office lacks authority to hold other agency heads accountable if procedures aren’t followed, she said. The governor does have that power, Campbell and others agreed. When Schultz asked whether Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, had “ever directed you or members of your team to stifle the reports of whistleblowers,” Campbell replied, “Absolutely not.” That is one accusation that Walz has faced from whistleblowers. Three Republicans who serve on the fraud committee—Reps. Kristin Robbins, Walter Hudson, and Marion Rarick—testified about that at a congressional hearing in Washington earlier this month. Walz has defended his record…

Texas AG Starts Investigation Into Vaccine-Related Financial Incentives Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Jan. 21 said he’s investigating incentives related to vaccinating children. Paxton’s office said in a statement that the probe will cover pediatricians, insurers, vaccine companies, and other entities “engaged in deceptive or unlawful conduct by failing to disclose financial incentives connected to their administration of childhood vaccines.” It noted that some pediatricians kick out families that refuse to adhere to a vaccine schedule and that doctors can receive bonuses for vaccinating. An Epoch Times investigation found that insurers have offered bonuses as high as $400 per child as an incentive to vaccinate patients. Paxton is issuing civil investigative demands for information to companies, including UnitedHealthcare and Pfizer. “I will ensure that Big Pharma and Big Insurance don’t bribe medical providers to pressure parents to jab their kids with vaccines they feel aren’t safe or necessary,” Paxton said in a statement. He said that Texans “deserve to have full faith in the recommendations of their medical providers—particularly when it involves the health of their children” and that “any provider or entity whose medical guidance is fueled by financial incentives from an insurance company, Big Pharma, or otherwise will be exposed.” Paxton’s office did not respond to a request for more information. UnitedHealthcare had said in a document, which was taken down after The Epoch Times’ story was published, that doctors were eligible for bonuses for patients who received vaccines against tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, and human papillomavirus. The Epoch Times reached out to UnitedHealthcare and Pfizer for comment, but they did not respond by publication time. Studies have found that vaccinations can be profitable, including a 2020 paper. Some doctors have said in surveys that they can lose money on vaccines due to certain factors, such as low reimbursements. The American Academy of Pediatrics, which partners with vaccine manufacturers, has said that pediatricians do not profit from vaccines and are motivated to vaccinate because, the group says, vaccines are safe and effective. Mary Holland, CEO of Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit that opposes vaccine mandates, said that the group was “very excited” about Paxton’s investigation. Children’s Health Defense this week sued the American Academy of Pediatrics, accusing the organization of violating federal law by promoting the vaccine schedule as proven safe. The academy did not respond to a request for comment. In its complaint, Children’s Health Defense mentioned how insurers offer bonuses for pediatricians whose patients receive certain vaccines, and pointed to a 2024 report from the academy that stated that “under value-based care models, pediatricians may receive a significant part of their payments based on performance metrics, one of which is completion of childhood and adolescent immunizations.” Paxton’s previous investigations have included a probe into Pfizer for allegedly misrepresenting the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine and toothpaste manufacturers for promoting the use of too much toothpaste. His case against Pfizer was dismissed in 2024. The toothpaste probe led to companies agreeing to redesign boxes for toothpaste containing fluoride. Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 18:25

Legislation Proposed To Make It Easier To Denaturalize Somali Fraudsters In the wake of the massive Somali-fraud scandal out of Minnesota and other states, President Donald Trump wants to denaturalize American immigrants convicted of crimes and deport them, but the current legal framework and federal bureaucracy make such sweeping denaturalization efforts difficult to achieve quickly. “I would do it in a heartbeat if they were dishonest,” Trump told the New York Times earlier this month. “I think that many of the people that came in from Somalia, they hate our country.” Existing federal law provides limited pathways for revoking the citizenship of naturalized citizens. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act the government can denaturalize individuals who obtained citizenship through fraud, misrepresentation, or the concealment of material facts during the naturalization process. The law does not allow automatic revocation based solely on crimes committed after naturalization. Current denaturalization proceedings require civil lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice in federal court or criminal prosecutions for naturalization fraud, both demanding individualized evidence, extensive litigation, and meeting high burdens of proof. Civil cases require “clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence,” while criminal prosecutions demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) has proposed a solution to this problem. He’s introduced the Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation (SCAM) Act in the Senate to expand federal denaturalization authority. The legislation creates a 10-year window after naturalization during which citizens who commit specified crimes could face citizenship revocation and deportation. Among those offenses are welfare fraud exceeding $10,000, aggravated felonies, espionage, and joining terrorist organizations, a category the bill explicitly extends to gangs and drug cartels. The measure also lowers the threshold for federal authorities to begin denaturalization proceedings by broadening the legal grounds beyond fraud committed during the citizenship application process. The bill even includes a fallback provision that automatically reduces the revocation window from ten years to five years if courts strike down the longer period as unconstitutional. “American citizenship is a privilege, and anyone hoping to be a part of our great nation must demonstrate a sincere attachment to our Constitution, upstanding moral character, and a commitment to the happiness and good order of the United States,” Schmitt said in a statement. “The rampant fraud uncovered in Minnesota must be a wakeup call. People who commit felony fraud, serious felonies, or join terrorist organizations like drug cartels shortly after taking their citizenship oaths fail to uphold the basic standards of citizenship. They must be denaturalized because they have proven they never met the requirements for the great honor of American citizenship in the first place. We must protect and restore the institution of American citizenship. No more talk. It’s time for action.” The White House publicly endorsed the legislation. “The Somali fraud scandal is one of the greatest financial scandals in American history,” said Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor. “All Somali refugees, or any other immigrants, who have committed fraud against the United States must be immediately denaturalized and deported. We applaud Senator Schmitt for his leadership.” Schmitt believes the Somali-based fraud is just the “tip of the iceberg” of what will soon be uncovered. “There’s also a bunch of money that went out the door at the end of the Biden administration that had nothing to do with COVID, but it was under the auspices of these COVID funds. I think you’re gonna see another wave of fraud,” he told Fox News’s Harris Faulkner earlier this week. “So, I think that’s probably at the heart of why Tim…

Narrative Control Made Easy: Us Versus Them Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog, Those in charge of narrative control are suffering from the delusion that they're making sense. Everything is under control until it isn't. The name of the game in controlling the populace is narrative control, the current term for setting the context, priorities and agenda so the populace complies without being aware they've been bamboozled into accepting a system that benefits the few at the expense of the many. The easiest way to control the narrative is to establish the false choice of an either-or binary: Us versus Them. This is easy because it bypasses our rational mind by tapping our hard-wired instinct to divide humanity into members of our group and Outsiders / Strangers who are potential threats until proven otherwise. As a general rule, our values, opinions and fealties stretch along a spectrum. We may have loyalties to values that are typically categorized as "conservative" or "liberal" and find no conflict between them. To control the narrative, all nuance and variability must be crushed into an all-or-nothing litmus test: if you disagree with even one of the narrowly defined litmus test standards for inclusion in the "conservative" or "liberal" group--as defined by those seeking to control the populace by controlling the narrative--then you are cast out as "an X in name only." The "other group" is vilified as servants of the Devil. Reading the diatribes mailed out to "loyalists" of the two political parties (seeking donations, of course--proving your loyalty is always about money) is a master class in parody that isn't recognized as parody: "they" are seeking to pollute our precious bodily fluids under the malefic cover of deceptively attractive PR. That all Us and Them binaries are false choices must never be exposed lest the rational mind awaken to the manipulation of a completely fabricated either-or narrative. This fabrication is the foundation of wartime propaganda, of course, as there are no limits on what must be done to rid the Earth of the enemy of all that is good and just. This works just as well in politics and culture wars: rally the troops by enforcing litmus-test inclusion standards that serve the purposes of those in charge of the narrative factory while providing an identity and the benefits of membership to those who declare their fealty to the litmus test checklist. Skeptics are targeted as backward heretics. If you question the current definition of "Progress"--Progress is whatever makes me more money--then you're instantly tarred as a hopeless Luddite. Once the consequences extend to money, income and security, fear kicks in. Standing up for sacred values is a good thing until it might cost us our jobs: when things get serious, we have to lie. This enforcement of false-choice narratives pushes us into Ultra-Processed Life: everything is self-serving artifice, but pointing this out brings trouble, so we go along with the charade. There's no meaning in the narrative other than enforcing compliance to what's on the agenda of options, which are all false-choice binaries: would you choose to be a Good Person or a Bad Person? Hmm, that's not much of a choice, is it? The irony here is that those controlling the narratives see our compliance as "winning," unaware that their control mechanisms have hollowed out the culture, politics and the economy, reducing everything to either-or binaries that are intrinsically false. Falsities generate false signals, which lead to Model Collapse. Those in charge of narrative control are suffering from the delusion that they're making sense. Everything is under control until it isn't. * * * My new book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free) Check out my updated Books and Films. Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com. Subscribe to my Substack…

Demographics Deployed For Political Control Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times, People are talking ever more about the possibility of civil war in the United States. The scenes on the streets do not look good, to be sure. That said, we are nowhere near this point and certainly don’t have to be. The trigger for the unfolding of events speaks to a tactic of control that unleashes resistance (and counterresistence) like no other. If this issue is resolved in peace and within the rule of law, normalcy can be restored. Let’s review some of the deeper history. At the height of the Roman Empire, when conquering ever more territory was regarded as regime triumph, a strategy for control emerged that would long persist into the modern age. The military would urge Romanization of the conquered provinces. The aristocracy would flood provinces and towns, bringing language and technology and administrative leadership. Roman citizens, often veterans of these wars, were settled with land grants and created loyal Roman outposts. Many modern European cities trace origins to these settlements. The tactic assured regional loyalty, lessened local resistance, and helped blunt the efficacy of independence movements. The Spanish Empire took a similar approach in the Americas. Massive settler migration from Iberia led to the demographic replacement of indigenous populations. Spanish was imposed as the dominant language. Indigenous tongues were suppressed. Localized religions mutated to match priorities of the imperial faith. So it was in the Soviet Union. After the archives opened following the fall of communism, scholars found proof of what they had long suspected. Hundreds of thousands of ethnic Russians were directed to migrate to the Baltic states following the 1940 annexation. The priorities were the same as the above examples: spread the Russian language, intermarry, and build and administer infrastructure. This weakened national identities and secured Russian holdings. All of these are examples of what is called settler colonialism. It’s a tactic, often a brutal one because it touches the lives, languages, educations, and religion of everyone. It can often be pitiless toward the settled traditions that are being displaced. The USA was born as an experiment in the same way via the British Empire. The English Court and its industrial partners had every intention of using the colonies for the empire’s own purposes, restricting trade and taxing its residents. It did not go so well. After 150 years of experience with freedom in the colonies, Americans developed a sense of independent identity that led to a war of independence that the colonies won. It is true that the United States began as a nation of immigrants and has always been a welcoming country. The early Founding documents left the issue of citizenship to the states because people were citizens of their states. Following a horrible Civil War, the federal government took charge of determining citizenship, alongside a peculiar model of earning the right to vote. All people born within its borders were automatically granted citizenship rights. Immigration became a source of controversy in the late 19th century with floods of new asylum seekers from Russia, Italy, Ireland, and elsewhere, thus taxing infrastructure and giving rise to ethnic and religious tensions. The immigration acts of 1921 and 1924 sought to settle those problems with a strong legal preference for European migration. Forty years later, this prioritization was deemed discriminatory. The immigration act of 1965 reversed priorities and opened up the country to a wider range of newly arriving residents to become citizens. Even with this change, the subject of immigration was regarded as a manageable domestic policy dispute, with people on all sides favoring this or that. The debates concerned economics, religion, and the issue of acculturation. What was not in question was the idea of using demographics for purposes…