In a political drama that has gripped Washington, leading Democrats are demanding the release of key evidence from a now-closed federal bribery investigation involving Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s so-called border czar. The controversy centers on allegations that Homan accepted $50,000 in cash from undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen in September 2024—just months before Trump’s return to office. The explosive claims, first reported by MSNBC and later confirmed by the New York Times, have sparked a firestorm on Capitol Hill and reignited fierce debate over the politicization of the Justice Department.
According to MSNBC, the FBI set up a sting after being tipped off by a separate corruption probe that Homan was allegedly soliciting bribes in exchange for promises of lucrative government contracts, should Trump win the 2024 election. The sting reportedly resulted in video footage of Homan accepting a brown paper bag—stuffed with $50,000 in cash—from undercover agents at a Cava restaurant. The incident, according to multiple sources, was caught on tape and became the centerpiece of a federal investigation launched under the Biden administration’s Department of Justice.
But the story takes a sharp turn after Trump’s return to the White House. The investigation, which had been quietly gathering steam through 2024, was abruptly closed in the weeks following Trump’s inauguration. The decision came after FBI Director Kash Patel—himself a Trump appointee and former White House national security aide—requested an update on the probe. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, another Trump loyalist and former criminal defense attorney, also played a role in shuttering the case, according to The BradCast and MSNBC.
The White House has categorically denied any wrongdoing by Homan. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters, “Mr. Homan never took the $50,000 that you’re referring to, so you should get your facts straight, number one. Number two, this was another example of the weaponization of the Biden Department of Justice against one of President Trump’s strongest and most vocal supporters in the midst of a presidential campaign.” Leavitt insisted that Homan “did absolutely nothing wrong.” The administration maintains that the entire investigation was a politically motivated effort to entrap a key Trump ally.
Homan himself has publicly denied any criminal conduct. Speaking to Fox News, he declared, “I did nothing criminal. I did nothing illegal. I’m glad the FBI and DOJ came out and said… that nothing illegal happened.” Yet, the administration’s narrative has not satisfied congressional Democrats, who point to the reported existence of video footage and the sudden closure of the investigation as evidence of a potential cover-up.
On September 23, 2025, House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee fired off a sharply worded letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Patel. “Do the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have video and audio recordings of White House ‘Border Czar’ Tom Homan accepting $50,000 in cash bribes from undercover FBI agents stuffed in a brown paper takeout bag from the restaurant chain Cava?” they wrote. “It certainly sounds like you do.” The letter demanded the immediate release of all recordings, investigative files, and internal communications related to the Homan probe.
Senate Democrats, not to be outdone, launched their own oversight investigation the same day. Their letter to the DOJ and FBI requested all related files by October 6, 2025, and posed a series of pointed questions about the investigation’s closure. Both chambers’ inquiries preview a potential flood of oversight activity should Democrats regain the majority in Congress next fall.
In their correspondence, House Democrats described Homan’s alleged conduct as “a strong case for conspiracy to commit bribery,” citing the assessment of the former chief of public corruption in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. “For the ‘agreement itself is the conspiracy crime,’ and would remain a crime even if the promisor ‘were never even appointed to anything at all,’” they wrote. The lawmakers also lambasted what they characterized as an “utterly shocking” cover-up and dismissed claims that the investigation’s origin under the previous administration made it improper. “Criminal investigations and prosecutions obviously go from one administration to the next all the time,” the letter noted, adding that the DOJ and FBI have routinely taken credit for long-running cases initiated under earlier leadership.
For critics of the Trump administration, the episode is emblematic of a broader pattern: the use of the Justice Department to reward friends and punish perceived enemies. Randall D. Eliason, former chief of the DOJ’s Public Corruption Section, weighed in on The BradCast, saying, “Accepting $50,000 in cash in a fast-food bag is kind of an indication of corrupt intent, that the recipient knows something shady is going on. So you’ve got to say at a bare minimum, there’s a substantial basis to conduct additional investigation.” Eliason argued that the White House and DOJ’s insistence that there was “no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing” didn’t “hold water,” given the reported facts. He further warned, “Trump sees the Justice Department as a tool that he can use to punish his enemies and reward his friends… This historical, very important norm that politics is kept separated, that the Justice Department is kept independent from the White House… has just been flipped completely on its head and thrown out the window.”
The administration, for its part, has pushed back hard against accusations of impropriety. In a joint statement to Fox News Digital, FBI Director Patel and Deputy Attorney General Blanche said, “This matter originated under the previous administration and was subjected to a full review by FBI agents and Justice Department prosecutors. They found no credible evidence of any criminal wrongdoing. The Department’s resources must remain focused on real threats to the American people, not baseless investigations. As a result, the investigation has been closed.” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson echoed those sentiments, calling the probe “blatantly political” and asserting that Homan is “a career law enforcement officer and lifelong public servant who is doing a phenomenal job on behalf of President Trump and the country.”
Yet, the existence of alleged video evidence, the abrupt closure of the investigation, and the sharp partisan divide over the case have left many in Washington uneasy. With Democrats demanding transparency and the White House standing firm, the Homan affair is shaping up to be a major flashpoint in the ongoing battle over the integrity and independence of the Justice Department. As the deadlines for document production approach, all eyes will be on the DOJ and FBI—and on whether the full story of what happened in that Cava restaurant bag will ever come to light.
For now, the episode stands as a vivid illustration of the deep mistrust and high stakes that characterize American politics in 2025, with the rule of law and the boundaries of executive power once again up for heated debate.
