By John Q. Hosedrinker 
According to an MSNBC report, the FBI recorded Tom Homan, Donald Trump’s border czar, allegedly accepting $50,000 in cash from undercover agents in September 2024, six weeks before the election, promising to assist in securing government contracts. The investigation, initiated under the Biden administration, was intended to monitor Homan after his appointment. However, after Trump took office, officials appointed by him closed the case, deeming it a “deep state” investigation. While federal officials believed they had a case for conspiracy to commit bribery, the investigation was ultimately shut down before any charges were brought forward.
Read the original article here
Trump border czar Tom Homan reportedly accepted $50,000 in cash from undercover FBI agents. Well, that’s certainly a headline that grabs your attention, doesn’t it? It’s hard to know where to start unpacking something like this, but let’s just dive right in. The crux of the matter, according to this report, is that Tom Homan, a key figure in Trump’s administration with significant power over border security, allegedly accepted a substantial bribe from what turned out to be undercover FBI agents. The details, as reported, paint a picture of potential corruption at a high level.
Apparently, the agents offered Homan $50,000 in cash, and he allegedly accepted it. The alleged reason for the payment was to secure government contracts related to border security should Trump win a second term. The timing is also interesting, happening just weeks before the 2024 election. And of course, we are all left wondering where the money is and if there is a video.
This isn’t just any accusation. This is an allegation of bribery involving a high-ranking official dealing with a sensitive area of national policy. Given the context, this could have serious implications. The report indicates that the investigation was initiated during the Biden administration but was later stalled or perhaps even shut down once Trump took office. It seems that the intention was to see if Homan would follow through on his alleged promises, potentially giving the government leverage for prosecution if needed.
The question then becomes, what happens next? What are the consequences? There is the possibility that we are talking about blatant corruption, and the idea that someone in such a position would allegedly take such a large sum of cash in exchange for something is concerning. Would it immediately be seen as a national security risk? Depending on the facts, this could have serious implications for Homan’s career and the broader perception of the integrity of border security and the government in general.
The idea that a high-ranking official might accept such a sum of money, especially in cash, is quite astonishing. You’d expect more sophistication if someone was trying to hide something. It’s just an envelope with cash? It does make you wonder about the potential for more widespread corruption if this is just the tip of the iceberg. And of course, the inevitable question is asked “where is the money?” The implications of this could extend beyond just Homan, potentially involving others who were involved in the contracts and the deal.
There seems to be a general cynicism, as one might expect, with such a story. There’s a sentiment of, “Of course, this happened,” which, while not necessarily productive, does reflect a degree of disappointment or disillusionment. The lack of surprise that such corruption might exist is itself a commentary on the state of politics. And the idea of it being a promotion for him is alarming.
The fact that the investigation seemed to be shut down or stalled is also cause for concern. It raises questions about accountability and whether political considerations are influencing the pursuit of justice. It seems that the case was closed under Trump, further fueling suspicions of a cover-up. The idea that he might be pardoned if convicted seems to be a common expectation.
Given all the background information, it is clear that if all the claims are true, they need to be thoroughly investigated, and those responsible must be held accountable. The fact that it allegedly happened underscores the need for transparency and a commitment to upholding ethical standards, especially at such a high level.