What evidence supports claims Tim Walz told Boelter to kill Democrats?
Executive summary
The primary public evidence that Vance Boelter claimed Gov. Tim Walz told him to kill Democratic lawmakers is a handwritten letter Boelter left for then‑FBI Director Kash Patel that prosecutors released; multiple outlets report Boelter wrote he had been “approached” and that Walz “wanted me to kill” senators or other Democrats [1] [2]. Independent reporting and law enforcement materials also show investigators found lists of roughly 70 political targets and other planning evidence in Boelter’s possession, but none of the mainstream reports cite corroborating evidence that Walz actually directed the attacks beyond Boelter’s own allegation [3] [4].
1. What the letter actually says — a lone, incriminating claim
Prosecutors released a rambling, handwritten letter Boelter left addressed to FBI Director Kash Patel in which he confessed to the shootings and included claims that he had been “approached” and that Tim Walz “wanted me to kill” certain Democratic lawmakers, including U.S. senators, because “Tim wants to be senator,” according to reporting in The Washington Post and CNN [1] [4]. Tabloid and entertainment outlets also published summaries of the letter’s assertions, repeating the specific phrase that Walz “selected” him to kill lawmakers [2].
2. Corroborating physical evidence tied to Boelter — lists and planning, not a Walz link
Law enforcement publicly says they found lists of around 70 targets, planning notes and other evidence that Boelter may have been preparing to strike additional politicians; outlets such as the BBC and BBC follow‑ups report Walz and other Democrats appeared on those lists [3]. Those documents and Boelter’s own confession provide evidence of his intent and planning, but reporting does not describe independent evidence (communications, witnesses, corroborating documents) linking Walz to any instruction to carry out violence [3] [4].
3. How media and political actors amplified the claim
Right‑wing influencers and some outlets rapidly amplified the allegation that Walz ordered the killings, framing Boelter as a “Walz appointee” or asserting a direct conspiracy; The Guardian and the Minnesota Reformer document how those narratives spread on social platforms and in partisan commentary [5] [6]. Conservative sites and commentators ran headlines repeating Boelter’s allegation, while fact‑checkers later found no evidence Walz had posted about or deleted posts related to Boelter, a separate misinformation thread [7] [5].
4. The staffing/appointment detail that fueled speculation
Part of the reason the allegation circulated was that Boelter had some prior official ties through state advisory boards: reporting notes he had been appointed to a workforce development board (initially by a predecessor and reappointed later), a detail that influencer networks used to imply a closer relationship with Walz than the record supports [8] [6]. Several outlets stress that describing Boelter as a “Walz appointee” exaggerated routine civic service and helped the claim spread [6].
5. What mainstream outlets and prosecutors emphasize — caution, and Boelter’s uncorroborated claim
Major outlets (Washington Post, CNN, BBC, PBS) and federal charging documents emphasize that the allegation that Walz ordered killings appears in Boelter’s own letter or notes; they treat it as an uncorroborated claim within a broader prosecution file documenting stalking, planning, murder and attempted murder [1] [4] [9]. Reporting highlights investigators’ focus on Boelter’s actions and materials rather than presenting independent proof that Walz solicited violence [4] [9].
6. Competing interpretations and partisan incentives
Sources show two competing reading frames: (A) Boelter’s letter could be read as a confession that names a powerful political figure as instigator; (B) it could be a delusional or self‑serving claim meant to shift blame or gain notoriety. Right‑wing influencers promoted the first frame to indict Walz politically, while fact‑checkers and several newsrooms urged restraint because no independent evidence has emerged to substantiate the claim beyond Boelter’s own words [5] [7].
7. What’s not in the reporting — no public corroboration of Walz’s involvement
Available sources do not mention any independent evidence — phone records, emails, witness testimony, surveillance, or other documents — that corroborates Boelter’s allegation Walz directed him to kill Democrats. Prosecutors’ public materials and mainstream reports limit the Walz reference to Boelter’s handwritten statements and to targets found among Boelter’s notes [1] [3] [4].
Bottom line: the publicly available, cited record shows Boelter claimed in a handwritten letter that Gov. Tim Walz approached or “selected” him to kill Democrats, and investigators uncovered lists and planning materials demonstrating Boelter’s targeting. But mainstream reporting and fact‑checking make clear that, as of the sources available here, there is no independent corroboration linking Walz to ordering the violence beyond Boelter’s own allegation [1] [3] [7].