‘I hereby plead incompetence and stupidity.’

That’s probably the best defense that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz can offer if he is criminally charged in the shocking multi-billion-dollar taxpayer ripoffs that grow larger by the day.

Given his earned reputation, his excuse of incompetence would be credible.

Nearly every social service program receiving federal dollars was fleeced by fraudsters right under Walz’s nose, including child nutrition, daycare, healthcare, housing, and autism aid. Most of the perpetrators were Somalians who comprise a powerful voting block that the governor treasures like gold.

Walz was repeatedly warned of the swindles as far back as 2019 when he first took office. Instead of stopping the scams and prosecuting the grifters, he indulged them by establishing a culture of permissible fraud.

The scandal has already claimed Walz’s political career, forcing him to abandon his bid for re-election. But if he reckoned that quitting would somehow shield him from legal culpability, he is mistaken. There is mounting evidence that Walz was willfully complicit, deliberately refusing to expose or pursue the monumental thefts and, instead, launching aggressive measures to scuttle any legal scrutiny and criminal consequence.  

The governor’s own state workers at the Department of Human Services issued a blistering statement blaming him as 100% responsible. Witnesses say he retaliated against whistleblowers and schemed to discredit the well-documented fraud reports.

If true, Walz’s aberrant actions run dangerously close to criminal behavior involving cover-ups and obstruction.  

Nine federal agencies, including the FBI, are now working to unravel the full breadth and depth of the colossal cons.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) has sent scores of investigators and lawyers to Minnesota to prosecute the web of fraud and deceit.

They will inevitably weigh whether Walz should face criminal charges himself.

Possible Federal Charges

There are several federal statutes to consider. 18 USC 371 makes it a crime to conspire with others to defraud the government. At present, there is no known evidence that Walz directly participated in the scams themselves or accepted money.

However, if he plotted to cover up the fraud by impairing, obstructing or defeating efforts to bring the fraudsters to justice, the conspiracy statute is applicable. So, too, are the various obstruction of justice laws.

There is also 18 USC 2, the aiding and abetting statute where accomplices are treated the same as the main perpetrators. That law gave rise to the ‘willful blindness doctrine’ recognized by our courts.

An example is a businessman who intentionally ignores or turns a blind eye to his partner’s money laundering, resulting in charges against both. Similarly, a public official such as Walz can be indicted for deliberate inaction where he has a clear duty to act.

Finally, 18 USC 3 is relevant whenever concealment occurs. Whoever knows that a crime has been committed but ‘hinders apprehension, trial or punishment,’ is guilty of accessory after the fact. That bears a striking resemblance to what Walz is accused of doing.

All of this invites the question of the governor’s motive. If not money, how did he stand to benefit by suppressing the avalanche of fraud? That’s the easy part. Votes.

Walz, together with liberal elites and their media handmaidens, have long dismissed the rumors and reports of Somali-engineered fraud as ‘racist.’ Apparently, in Minnesota it is politically incorrect to enforce the law against immigrants from that particular East African country. It’s just not fashionable.

God forbid that putting criminals behind bars might lose electoral support. It’s chic to turn the other cheek.

So, the Somalian fraudsters were gifted a ‘get-out-of-jail’ free card, courtesy of the governor and his cronies. Walz, in turn, secured their votes. It was a nifty quid pro quo, but with an alternate currency —votes. As protection rackets go, it was slick.   

That cozy arrangement is manifested in a recently uncovered audio recording of a 2021 conversation between Walz’s Attorney General Keith Ellison and Somali hustlers who were soon after convicted of scamming millions of dollars. They were heard leaning hard on the AG to ‘protect’ them in exchange for support and campaign donations.  

Ellison eagerly capitulated but now denies any wrongdoing. He returned the cash.           

Walz’s Incompetence Defense

It is too early to know whether a criminal case will be filed against Minnesota’s beleaguered governor. The U.S. Attorney and DOJ lawyers are still digging through the mountains of evidence.

However, as noted above, the only tenable defense Walz may be able to conjure up is incompetence and stupidity. It is something that jurors might readily accept.

After all, ineptitude became the governor’s calling card. He infamously conceded his own buffoonery in the 2024 Vice Presidential debate when he called himself a ‘knucklehead.’ He was such a gaffe factory that the Kamala Harris campaign squirreled him away from the media.     

Walz achieved the impossible. He made his running mate look like a genius. His bizarre on-stage antics were constant fodder for mockery. Baffling verbal goofs, such as boasting that he had ‘become friends with school shooters,’ left voters scratching their heads or snickering.  

A series of demonstrable lies about his military service and his peculiar treks to China only compounded the impression of a man who is either a serial fabricator or not right in the head. Maybe both are true.  

And who can forget his epic bungling of the George Floyd riots in 2020. He radicalized the tragic death, thereby ginning up the ensuing violence. As Minneapolis burned, Walz dithered. Afterwards, he blamed the looting and torched buildings on systemic racism.

So, it’s not a stretch to imagine that an indictment alleging Walz was wittingly complicit in his state’s massive welfare fraud scandal might be met with a defense of ‘misfeasance’ (careless or incompetent execution of a lawful duty) to combat the incriminating evidence of ‘malfeasance’ (a deliberate, unlawful act).   

It’s a distinction that can mean the difference between conviction and acquittal.

Should Walz find himself in the dock sometime soon… don’t be surprised if he portrays himself as a blockhead who was intellectually incapable of grasping the obvious.

Minnesota jurors who know the governor would understand completely.

Greenland’s leadership is pushing back on President Donald Trump as he and his administration call for the U.S. to take control of the island. Several Trump administration officials have backed the president’s calls for a takeover of Greenland, with many citing national security reasons.

‘We don’t want to be Americans, we don’t want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,’ Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and four party leaders said in a statement Friday night, according to The Associated Press. Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory and a longtime U.S. ally, has repeatedly rejected Trump’s statements about U.S. acquiring the island.

Greenland’s party leaders reiterated that the island’s ‘future must be decided by the Greenlandic people.’

‘As Greenlandic party leaders, we would like to emphasize once again our wish that the United States’ contempt for our country ends,’ the statement said.

Trump was asked about the push to acquire Greenland on Friday during a roundtable with oil executives. The president, who has maintained that Greenland is vital to U.S. security, said it was important for the country to make the move so it could beat its adversaries to the punch.

‘We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not,’ Trump said Friday. ‘Because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.’

Trump hosted nearly two dozen oil executives at the White House on Friday to discuss investments in Venezuela after the historic capture of President Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3.

‘We don’t want to have Russia there,’ Trump said of Venezuela on Friday when asked if the nation appears to be an ally to the U.S. ‘We don’t want to have China there. And, by the way, we don’t want Russia or China going to Greenland, which, if we don’t take Greenland, you can have Russia or China as your next-door neighbor. That’s not going to happen.’ 

Trump said the U.S. is in control of Venezuela after the capture and extradition of Maduro. 

Nielsen has previously rejected comparisons between Greenland and Venezuela, saying that his island was looking to improve its relations with the U.S., according to Reuters.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said on Monday that Trump’s threats to annex Greenland could mean the end of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

‘I also want to make it clear that if the U.S. chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops. Including our NATO and thus the security that has been provided since the end of the Second World War,’ Frederiksen told Danish broadcaster TV2.

That same day, Nielsen said in a statement posted on Facebook that Greenland was ‘not an object of superpower rhetoric.’

White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller doubled down on Trump’s remarks, telling CNN in an interview on Monday that Greenland ‘should be part of the United States.’

CNN anchor Jake Tapper pressed Miller about whether the Trump administration could rule out military action against the Arctic island.

‘The United States is the power of NATO. For the United States to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the United States,’ he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump pushed back on suggestions from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that the United States could capture Russian President Vladimir Putin after Zelensky pointed to Washington’s recent action against Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

Trump waved off the idea of such an operation, while venting frustration over the grinding war and his failure so far to bring it to an end. Trump has repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he could end the war on his first day back in office, but despite meetings with both Zelenskyy and Putin, a resolution remains elusive.

‘Well, I don’t think it’s going to be necessary,’ Trump said in response to a question from Fox News’ Peter Doocy during a meeting with US oil companies executives at the White House Friday.

‘I’ve always had a great relationship with him. I’m very disappointed,’ Trump said of Putin. ‘I settled eight wars. I thought this would be in the middle of the pack, or maybe one of the easier ones.’

Trump said the conflict continues to take a heavy toll, particularly on Russian forces, and claimed Moscow’s economy is suffering as well.

‘And in the last month they lost 31,000 people, many of them Russian soldiers,’ Trump said, adding that the Russian economy is ‘doing poorly.’

‘I think we’re going to end up getting it settled,’ Trump said. ‘I wish we could have done it quicker because a lot of people are dying.’

‘But largely it’s the soldier population,’ he continued. ‘When you have 30,000, 31,000 soldiers dying in a period of a month, 27,000 the month before, 26,000 the month before that. That’s bad stuff.’

Trump also criticized the Biden administration for sending what he said was $350 billion to Ukraine, arguing the U.S. should be able to recoup costs through a rare earth minerals agreement tied to continued support. He also claimed the U.S. is not losing money in the conflict, saying Washington is benefiting through arms sales to NATO allies, and pointed to NATO’s pledge to raise defense and security spending toward 5% of GDP by 2035, up from the longstanding 2% benchmark.

‘We’re not losing any money. We’re making a lot of money.’

Zelenskyy’s comments came after Russia said it fired its new nuclear-capable Oreshnik hypersonic missile as part of a massive overnight attack on Ukraine, a claim Kyiv disputed. Ukrainian officials said the barrage involved hundreds of drones and multiple missiles and struck energy facilities and civilian infrastructure, killing at least four people. 

Zelenskyy called on the United States and the international community to respond, saying Russia must face consequences for attacks targeting ordinary civilians.

Fox News’ Rachel Wolf contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order blocking U.S. courts from seizing Venezuelan oil revenues held in American Treasury accounts.

The order, titled ‘Safeguarding Venezuelan Oil Revenue for the Good of the American and Venezuelan People,’ states that any court attempt to seize the funds would pose an ‘unusual and extraordinary threat’ to U.S. national security and foreign policy.

It also states that the funds remain the sovereign property of Venezuela and are not assets available to private creditors or judgment holders.

The order says the United States will hold the funds ‘solely in a custodial and governmental capacity,’ not as a commercial participant.

It was issued to prevent private creditors from using U.S. courts to seize the funds before the administration determines how they will be used.

The funds are held in U.S. Treasury accounts on behalf of Venezuela’s government and its state-run oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A., and are derived from oil sales and related transactions.

Trump signed the order on Friday, the same day that he met with nearly two dozen top oil and gas executives at the White House. 

The president said American energy companies will invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s ‘rotting’ oil infrastructure and push production to record levels following the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

The U.S. has moved aggressively to take control of Venezuela’s oil future following the collapse of the Maduro regime.

Trump has framed the effort as part of a broader push to reshape Venezuela’s oil industry following the collapse of the Maduro regime, with U.S. companies expected to play a central role.

Four tankers that left Venezuela in early January with their transponders off, also known as ‘dark mode,’ have reportedly returned to the country’s waters. The news comes after several U.S. tanker seizures and amid the Trump administration’s push to acquire Venezuelan oil following the arrest of dictator Nicolás Maduro.

Most of the four tankers were loaded, according to Reuters, which noted that Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), a state-owned company, and monitoring service TankerTrackers.com had reported the vessels’ return.

A flotilla of approximately one dozen loaded vessels as well as at least three empty ships left Venezuelan waters last month, despite a U.S. blockade that has been imposed since mid-December, according to Reuters.

One of the vessels, the supertanker M Sophia, which had the Panamanian flag, was intercepted by the U.S. earlier this week, as was the Olina, which had the flag of Sao Tome And Principe, according to Reuters. The outlet reported, citing PDVSA, that the Olina was released to Venezuela on Friday.

The Olina had been seized by U.S. forces in a pre-dawn mission on Friday. The U.S. Southern Command said that Marines and sailors from Joint Task Force Southern Spear worked on the mission in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security.

‘Apprehensions like this are backed by the full power of the U.S. Navy’s Amphibious Ready Group, including the ready and lethal platforms of the USS Iwo Jima, USS San Antonio, and USS Fort Lauderdale,’ the U.S. Southern Command wrote in a post on X. ‘The Department of War’s Operation Southern Spear is unwavering in its mission to defend our homeland by ending illicit activity and restoring security in the Western Hemisphere.’

The Olina, previously named the Minerva M, was sanctioned by the United States for its role in transporting Russian oil, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Three other vessels that departed Venzuela in the flotilla, Panama-flagged Merope, Cook Islands-flagged Min Hang and Panama-flagged Thalia III, were spotted late Friday in Venezuelan waters by TankerTrackers.com, Reuters reported.

On Friday, Trump hosted nearly two dozen oil executives at the White House to discuss investment in Venezuela after the U.S. military’s successful capture of Maduro. The executives represented several major companies, including Chevron, Exxon, ConocoPhillips, Continental, Halliburton, HKN, Valero, Marathon, Shell, Trafigura, Vitol Americas, Repsol, Eni, Aspect Holdings, Tallgrass, Raisa Energy and Hilcorp.

‘You have total safety, total security. One of the reasons you couldn’t go in is you had no guarantees, you had no security, but now you have total security,’ Trump said during the meeting. 

‘It’s a whole different Venezuela and Venezuela is going to be very successful, and the people of the United States are going to be big beneficiaries because we’re going to be extracting, you know, numbers of in terms of oil, like, you know, few people have ever seen actually. So, you’re dealing with us directly. You’re not dealing with Venezuela at all. We don’t want you to deal with Venezuela,’ the president added.

The president also predicted that the acquisition of Venezuelan oil would lead to massive wealth, lower taxes and ‘lots of jobs for Americans and for Venezuelans.’

Days before the meeting with oil executives, Trump said that Venezuela would be turning over between 30 million and 50 million barrels of ‘high-quality,’ sanctioned oil to the U.S. He made the announcement on Truth Social and said that the oil would be sold at market price and that he would ‘control the proceeds to ensure it is ‘used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!’

Fox News Digital’s Emma Colton and Sophia Compton contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump pushed back on suggestions from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that the United States could capture Russian President Vladimir Putin after Zelensky pointed to Washington’s recent action against Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

Trump waved off the idea of such an operation, while venting frustration over the grinding war and his failure so far to bring it to an end. Trump repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he could end the war on his first day back in office. Despite meetings with both Zelenskyy and Putin, a resolution remains elusive.

‘Well, I don’t think it’s going to be necessary,’ Trump said in response to a question from Fox News’ Peter Doocy during a meeting with U.S. oil companies executives at the White House Friday.

‘I’ve always had a great relationship with him. I’m very disappointed,’ Trump said of Putin. ‘I settled eight wars. I thought this would be in the middle of the pack or maybe one of the easier ones.’

Trump said the conflict continues to take a heavy toll, particularly on Russian forces, and claimed Moscow’s economy is suffering.

‘And in the last month, they lost 31,000 people, many of them Russian soldiers,’ Trump said, adding that the Russian economy is ‘doing poorly.’

‘I think we’re going to end up getting it settled,’ Trump said. ‘I wish we could have done it quicker because a lot of people are dying.

‘But largely it’s the soldier population,’ he continued. ‘When you have 30,000, 31,000 soldiers dying in a period of a month, 27,000 the month before, 26,000 the month before that. That’s bad stuff.’

Trump also criticized the Biden administration for sending what he said was $350 billion to Ukraine, arguing the U.S. should be able to recoup costs through a rare earth minerals agreement tied to continued support. He also claimed the U.S. is not losing money in the conflict, saying Washington is benefiting through arms sales to NATO allies, pointing to NATO’s pledge to raise defense and security spending toward 5% of GDP by 2035, up from the longstanding 2% benchmark.

‘We’re not losing any money. We’re making a lot of money,’ Trump said. 

Zelenskyy made his comments after Russia said it fired its new nuclear-capable Oreshnik hypersonic missile as part of a massive overnight attack on Ukraine, a claim Kyiv disputed. Ukrainian officials said the barrage involved hundreds of drones and multiple missiles and struck energy facilities and civilian infrastructure, killing at least four people. 

Zelenskyy called on the United States and the international community to respond, saying Russia must face consequences for attacks targeting ordinary civilians.

Fox News’ Rachel Wolf contributed to this report.

An anti-regime protester scaled the balcony of Iran’s Embassy in London on Friday and tore down the Islamic Republic’s flag, replacing it with Iran’s pre-1979 ‘Lion and Sun’ emblem, video shows.

The demonstrator climbed the front of the embassy building in Kensington before ripping down the regime’s flag and hoisting the historic symbol associated with Iran’s monarchy prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution as a large crowd of anti-regime protesters cheered on.

The Metropolitan Police said officers responded to the scene and made two arrests — one for aggravated trespass and assault on an emergency worker, and another for aggravated trespass. Police said they are also seeking another individual for trespass. It was not immediately clear whether the protester who tore down the flag was among those arrested.

Fox News Digital reached out to Iran’s Embassy in London for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

The embassy protest comes as Iran faces its most significant wave of unrest in years. President Trump has warned the regime that the U.S. will protect protesters if necessary.

Potkin Azarmehr, a British-Iranian journalist, said the current unrest stands in sharp contrast to Iran’s 2009 Green Movement, when protesters openly questioned whether the Obama administration supported them.

‘What a contrast to Obama’s time, when protesters in Iran were chanting, ‘Obama, are you with us or with them?’’ Azarmehr told Fox News Digital.

‘Any international support, whether at the grassroots or government level, is encouraging,’ he said.

He said global attention matters to protesters on the ground, but questioned the lack of visible demonstrations by Western activist groups.

‘The question is where are the Western activist elite protesters? Why are they not protesting? Are they on the side of the ayatollahs? An archaic religious apartheid?’

Demonstrations that began on Dec. 28 over economic grievances have since spread nationwide, evolving into a direct challenge to Iran’s clerical leadership. Solidarity protests with Iranian demonstrators have also emerged in other major European cities, including Paris and Berlin. A protest also took place outside the White House in Washington, D.C.

As of Saturday, at least 72 people have been killed and more than 2,300 detained in Iran-based protests, according to the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency.

Some protests have included chants supporting Iran’s former monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who died in 1980. His son, Reza Pahlavi, has publicly called for continued demonstrations. The Iranian regime has also cut nationwide internet access.

At a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Trump said Iran was facing mounting pressure.

‘Iran’s in big trouble,’ Trump said. ‘It looks to me that the people are taking over certain cities that nobody thought were really possible just a few weeks ago. We’re watching the situation very carefully.’

Trump warned the United States would respond forcefully if the regime resorts to mass violence.

‘We’ll be hitting them very hard where it hurts,’ Trump said. ‘And that doesn’t mean boots on the ground, but it means hitting them very, very hard where it hurts.’

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has signaled a coming clampdown despite U.S. warnings, according to The Associated Press.

Tehran escalated its threats Saturday, with Iran’s attorney general, Mohammad Movahedi Azad, warning that anyone taking part in protests would be considered an ‘enemy of God,’ a charge that carries the death penalty. The statement, carried by Iranian state television, said even those who ‘helped rioters’ would face the charge.

‘Prosecutors must carefully and without delay, by issuing indictments, prepare the grounds for the trial and decisive confrontation with those who, by betraying the nation and creating insecurity, seek foreign domination over the country,’ the statement read.

‘Proceedings must be conducted without leniency, compassion or indulgence.’

Fox News’ Efrat Lachter, Greg Norman and The Associated Press contributed to this report.