9 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Trump Justice Dept. Closed Investigation Into Tom Homan for Accepting Bag of Cash

Tom Homan, who was later named President Trump’s border czar, was recorded in September 2024 accepting a bag with $50,000 in cash in an undercover F.B.I. investigation, according to people familiar with the case, which was later shut down by Trump administration officials.

 

The cash payment, which was made inside a bag from the food chain Cava, grew out of a long-running counterintelligence investigation that had not been targeting Mr. Homan, according to the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the case.

 

Mr. Homan’s encounter with the undercover agents, recorded on audiotape, led him to be investigated for potential bribery and other crimes, after he apparently took the money and agreed to help the agents — who were posing as businessmen — secure future government contracts related to border security, the people said.

https://archive.ph/2L3Ux#selection-513.0-513.81

 

 

typical Maga/Trump supporter, when it's convenient deny, divert and deny again

@Yellowtail Indeed he appears to be another criminal with conflicts of interest.

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-border-tom-homan-firm-federal-contracts-1235219657

1 hour ago, blaze master said:

Tom homan. You mean the same guy who has worked for many presidents ? Including Obama and Biden.

 

That guy ?

Thank you for confirming that the investigation was not politically motivated! 🤣

6 hours ago, JakeC said:

Just a den of criminals...

And just how much has the troll in chief grifted since he’s disgraced the White House this time around?Mr Homan is small potatoes…not to mention all those for profit companies running Donnie’s concentration camps…now there’s some grifting action!!that government trough is just overflowing with tax dollars now there’s the pickings!!

Just now, Tug said:

And just how much has the troll in chief grifted since he’s disgraced the White House this time around?Mr Homan is small potatoes…not to mention all those for profit companies running Donnie’s concentration camps…now there’s some grifting action!!that government trough is just overflowing with tax dollars now there’s the pickings!!

 

 

Making the Thais look like rank amateurs......555

 

 

So, in a nutshell.......no charges filed against Tom Homan, insufficient evidence to prove a crime (e.g., bribery), and no new evidence has emerged as of September 21, 2025. The FBI probe was closed in early 2025 by Trump appointees, citing lack of a clear quid pro quo.....

Just now, Will B Good said:

 

 

Making the Thais look like rank amateurs......555

 

 

Well Donnie is a expert,a lifelong practitioner of the grift and ripping others off.his charity scam his university scam god only knows how many fraudulent real estate deals…the banks ect ect yup he the master of fraud….this homan dude is small potatoes and nothing will ever come of it.sad 

30 minutes ago, JakeC said:

@Yellowtail Indeed he appears to be another criminal with conflicts of interest.

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-border-tom-homan-firm-federal-contracts-1235219657

That's all you have, really? 

 

And it's behind a paywall 

34 minutes ago, candide said:

Thank you for confirming that the investigation was not politically motivated! 🤣

 

Thank you for confirming you live in a dream world. 

 

Bye.

18 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

So, in a nutshell.......no charges filed against Tom Homan, insufficient evidence to prove a crime (e.g., bribery), and no new evidence has emerged as of September 21, 2025. The FBI probe was closed in early 2025 by Trump appointees, citing lack of a clear quid pro quo.....

 

There was "no concrete evidence he was going to perform a specific task in return for the money."

 

That was how the DOJ squirmed out of having to charge him.

 

There seems to be no dispute he was touting for business. He was not the FBI target originally, he came onto their adar during another investigation. It also seems there's little doubt he accepted the cash, it was handed over to him (all on CCTV)......the money was never recovered.

 

Hardly Mr Squeaky Clean......

So, in a nutshell, the Trump haters will lie and say whatever they like about anyone they disagree with. 

 

Makes perfect sense, and not having to actually argue a point, makes is easy. 

41 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

There was "no concrete evidence he was going to perform a specific task in return for the money."

 

That was how the DOJ squirmed out of having to charge him.

 

There seems to be no dispute he was touting for business. He was not the FBI target originally, he came onto their adar during another investigation. It also seems there's little doubt he accepted the cash, it was handed over to him (all on CCTV)......the money was never recovered.

 

Hardly Mr Squeaky Clean......

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

5 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

 Merrick Garland should have got Leticia James or Alvin Bragg on the job, they'd a got him. 

7 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

Yeah, nothing to see here except for a bag with 50k in it. And who hasn't gotten a bag with tens of thousands of $ handed to them, right?

Nothing to see here, move along!

I got a bag with about $35K in it once. 

 

 

 

ICE Detains Immigrant with 49 Prior Arrests

14 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

 

So legalities aside, you are totally confident he did nothing wrong?

16 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

Sleazy, obviously. Criminal, not so much.

55 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Sleazy, obviously. Criminal, not so much.

Given your avatar, calling someone sleezy is a bit ironic. 

3 hours ago, Will B Good said:

 

So legalities aside, you are totally confident he did nothing wrong?

Totally confident implies 100% certainty, so no I am not totally confident he did nothing wrong.

But there again when I fly on a plane I am not totally confident it will land safely!

A good example of Trump DOJ's double standards! 🙂

On 9/21/2025 at 11:11 AM, KhunLA said:

Syndrome therapy should be available somewhere.  Try to get some sleep 😎

Truly.

Twitler Defense Syndrome is out of control.

18 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

The DOJ didn’t “squirm out” but used a standard legal threshold—no concrete evidence of a specific task tied to the payment. The case was weak due to Homan’s lack of authority and no explicit quid pro quo.

IRS will determine if it was claimed as income and properly taxed.

Oh wait.

15 minutes ago, Peabody said:

IRS will determine if it was claimed as income and properly taxed.

Oh wait.

Where's Lois Lerner when you need her. 

White House says Tom Homan did ‘nothing wrong’ following reports he accepted a bag of cash

 

2 hr ago
“The president stands by Tom Homan 100% because he did absolutely nothing wrong, and he is a brave public servant who has done a phenomenal job in helping the president shut down the border,” (Karoline) Leavitt said during a press briefing.

 

Leavitt on Monday defended that decision, going as far as to dispute that Homan had taken the $50,000 in the first place.

 

““Mr. Homan never took the $50,000 that you’re referring to,” Ms. Leavitt said. “This was another example of the weaponization of the Biden Department of Justice against one of President Trump’s strongest and most vocal supporters,” she said, accusing the FBI of “going undercover to try and entrap” Homan.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/22/politics/tom-homan-white-house-investigation-reports

19 hours ago, Peabody said:

IRS will determine if it was claimed as income and properly taxed.

 

State, city, and local tax authorities might have an interest as well.

 

One assumes that if homan (auto corrects to "Homer" which seems spot on) did nothing wrong, he would speak out and inform the public that...

 

he didn't take any money

 

or

 

he took some money for --insert reason here--.

 

And the authorities should release the complete file along with video/audio recordings.

 

In the name of cough, 'transparency'.

 

 

What moron takes a bag of cash in 2024? Venal? Yep. Stupid? Yep yep.

 

 

homan denies he did anything criminal or illegal. But does not deny that he took a bag o cash.

 

 

 

 

At this moment the 'evidence' is all 'hearsay' from anonymous sources.

No one can prove Homan accepted the cash.

it's unverified reporting, dramatized by outlets like MSNBC and others for impact. The Trump DOJ closed it for lack of evidence, and Leavitt's denial stands unchallenged without the tape.

 

 

15 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

At this moment the 'evidence' is all 'hearsay' from anonymous sources.

No one can prove Homan accepted the cash.

AI quickie

 

The names of the specific undercover agents involved in the (Homan) operation have not been publicly disclosed. It is standard practice for the identities of undercover law enforcement officers to remain confidential to protect their safety and the integrity of ongoing and future investigations.

47 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

No one can prove Homan accepted the cash.

 

homan could.

On 9/21/2025 at 1:14 AM, KhunLA said:

Why would I bother reading the OP's drivel & hate.   The use of 'Czar' tells me everything I need to know about the OP,

 

Maybe the OP is a Czar wannabe