Fact check: Is Walz being looked at for conspiracy of assassination

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, there is no credible evidence that Governor Tim Walz is being investigated for conspiracy of assassination. The sources reveal a complex web of unsubstantiated claims and conspiracy theories rather than legitimate legal proceedings.

The primary incident referenced involves shooting suspect Vance Boelter, who allegedly wrote a rambling letter to the FBI claiming that Governor Walz instructed him to kill Senator Amy Klobuchar as part of a scheme to boost Walz's political career ^[1]. However, federal prosecutors have described these accusations as a "delusion" ^[2]. Multiple fact-checking sources found no evidence that Walz and Boelter were closely acquainted or that Walz was linked to the shootings ^[3].

Governor Walz himself has directly addressed these conspiracy theories, denying knowing the suspect or hiring him to kill anyone ^[2]. A spokesperson for Walz's office explained that the governor appoints thousands of people to unpaid boards and commissions, indicating any connection would be purely administrative rather than personal ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial context about the source and nature of these assassination conspiracy claims. The analyses reveal that:

• Conservative influencers have been actively promoting unsubstantiated theories linking Walz to the Minnesota lawmakers' shootings ^[3]
• Russian intelligence operations have been identified as attempting to spread baseless claims about Walz on social media ^[4]
• Fabricated content, including videos featuring fake former students making false claims about Walz, has been circulating online ^[5]

The question also omits the broader context of ongoing fraud investigations into Minnesota state programs under Walz's administration, including the Housing Stabilization Services program, which may be contributing to political scrutiny but are unrelated to assassination conspiracy claims ^{[6] [7] [8]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears to legitimize unfounded conspiracy theories by framing them as potential fact rather than investigating their credibility. The phrasing suggests an assumption that such an investigation exists, when the evidence shows:

• The claims originate from a suspect's delusional letter rather than credible intelligence or law enforcement sources ^[1]
• Foreign disinformation campaigns are actively promoting false narratives about Walz ^[4]
• Partisan political actors benefit from spreading these unverified theories to damage Walz's reputation ^[3]

The question fails to acknowledge that federal prosecutors and fact-checkers have explicitly rejected these conspiracy theories as baseless ^{[2] [3]}. By asking "Is Walz being looked at for conspiracy of assassination" without noting the lack of credible evidence, the question itself may inadvertently amplify misinformation that serves the interests of political opponents and foreign adversaries seeking to undermine public trust in democratic institutions.