Yes, it’s back in the headlines. From Fox News,
Minnesota Fraud Exposed
New audit exposes flawed system critics say let Minnesota fraud slip through cracks: ‘Didn’t act for years’
Long story short: the state’s Dept. of Human Services refused to investigate reports of kickbacks to “client” families paid by vendors in the state’s billion-dollar autism therapy program because…reasons.
The Feeding Our Future child nutrition fraud will see six (6) more guilty pleas filed this week. The defendants are all part of the same extended family (surname Mohamed) who stole some $12 million from taxpayers from a program meant to feed hungry, low-income children. This will bring the total number of guilty pleas and courtroom convictions in the case up to 63. More sentences are scheduled for this month in the case. Eventually, the defendants will be collectively sentenced to hundreds of years in federal prison (you serve the full sentence at the federal level) and ordered to repay hundreds of millions of dollars in stolen funds.
Whenever I report on such developments, there are always replies to the effect of “why bother?” because “nothing ever happens.”
The “nothing” that they refer to is the resignation, indictment, imprisonment, and bankruptcy of Gov. Tim Walz, state Attorney General Keith Ellison, and U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.
All three share significant culpability for the multi-billion-dollar frauds committed, primarily by persons from the state’s Somali-ethnic community. All three were aware of the fraud, while the fraud was occurring. All three failed to stop the fraud when each had the power to do so. All three benefitted from campaign donations and election votes provided by the fraudsters.
That’s nonfeasance. Did/do they have a “duty of care”? Have they broken any prosecutable law? Is gross negligence a crime? Under what statute (state or federal) or legal theory could they be subject to criminal prosecution?
I am not a lawyer, but I wonder if a prosecutor could develop a case under the concept of “honest services.” Would the campaign donations and votes constitute a “bribe”? Would the refusal to take action constitute an official act?
In the case of Tim Walz, the approval of fraudulent vendor applications and the resumption of payments to fraudulent vendors would represent official acts taken by his administration.
How do you directly link the “quid” to the “pro quo”?
I think all would agree that the matter is at a minimum a political question. Two of the three are running for re-election this year (Walz dropped his re-election bid.)
