NS. In a recent Cabinet meeting, Trump didn’t just tie the scandal to the Somali community — he went after Ilhan Omar by name. He called her a “terrible person,” accused her of “hating everyone,” and claimed Somalis “contribute nothing,” even pushing for their expulsion from the United States.

The political air in Washington had already been thick with tension, but the moment President Donald Trump entered the Cabinet meeting room last week, staffers could feel an unfamiliar heaviness settling in. Reports surrounding a major fraud scandal in Minnesota — one that involved the misuse of federal nutrition funds and had drawn national scrutiny — were dominating headlines. The scandal was being discussed everywhere, from newsrooms to living rooms, and the pressure on political leaders had reached a boiling point.

But few expected the meeting to evolve the way it did.

According to multiple accounts from those present, Trump did not merely address the scandal in policy terms. He shifted the conversation toward the Somali community in Minnesota, one of the largest in the United States, and then took direct aim at Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who represents a district with a significant Somali-American population. What followed was a moment that staff described as “charged,” “unusually personal,” and “impossible to ignore.”

Trump reportedly called Omar a “terrible person,” claiming she “hates everyone” and contributes nothing positive to the country. He linked the scandal to broader criticisms of Somali immigrants, suggesting that they provided “no contribution” and stating his desire to see them expelled from the United States. While his comments aligned with previous public criticisms he has made toward Omar, the intensity and focus of his remarks startled several officials in the room.

Ilhan Omar, a Somali-born American and one of the most prominent progressive figures in Congress, has long been a political foil for Trump. Their clashes date back to his first term, continuing through campaign rallies, interviews, and social media exchanges. Omar’s public response to the scandal in Minnesota emphasized that many members of the Somali community were victims, not perpetrators, and that the actions of a few should not define hundreds of thousands of law-abiding immigrants. But inside the Cabinet meeting, Trump’s tone suggested that he saw no distinction.

What makes the moment even more compelling is what came after the outburst. The room reportedly fell silent — not the comfortable silence of colleagues thinking, but the kind of thick pause that forms when everyone recognizes a line might have been crossed. Senior advisers exchanged glances. A few took notes, others froze mid-gesture, unsure whether to engage or let the moment pass.

Then, unexpectedly, the conversation shifted. One Cabinet member gently steered the discussion back toward federal oversight and policy, attempting to cool the temperature. Others followed, but the energy in the room didn’t return to normal. Even as charts and reports resumed their place on the table, the earlier eruption seemed to hang in the air like smoke.

Outside the room, the repercussions were immediate. News of the meeting — or at least fragments of it — began circulating among staffers, journalists, and political strategists. By the following morning, the clash between Trump and Omar had become one of the day’s most talked-about political stories. Supporters argued that Trump was speaking bluntly about concerns within the community, while critics condemned the remarks as inflammatory and discriminatory.

Omar’s office responded with force. In statements to the press, she described the president’s rhetoric as hateful and dangerous, warning that it could encourage hostility toward Somali-Americans who had no connection to the scandal. She challenged the idea that entire communities should be blamed for the actions of a few and emphasized their long-standing contributions to Minnesota’s social and economic fabric. Her rebuttal resonated with allies across Congress who viewed the president’s comments as a form of collective punishment.

Meanwhile, Minnesota became a political flashpoint. Protests, counter-protests, and community gatherings erupted across the state as residents reacted to both the scandal and the political fallout surrounding it. Some demanded stronger accountability from federal agencies; others condemned national politicians for weaponizing the crisis. Social media platforms swarmed with video clips, statements, and debates, many of them emotionally charged.

As the dust settled in the days that followed, one question lingered: What exactly happened in that Cabinet room after Trump’s remarks — and why did the mood shift so drastically? Some insiders say that senior officials feared the meeting would spiral further. Others suggest that the silence came from uncertainty — uncertainty about policy, about political consequences, or about how far the president was willing to push the issue.

While the details of the meeting continue to unfold, one reality is clear: the confrontation between Trump and Omar has become a potent symbol of the broader national divide — a divide over immigration, accountability, and the identity of the country itself. The Minnesota scandal may have been the spark, but the political explosion that followed has taken on a life of its own.