The accusations are explosive: That in 2024, Tom Homan, now President Trump’s border czar, met with some businessmen who handed him $50,000 stuffed into a bag from Cava, the fast-casual restaurant chain; in exchange, Mr. Homan would help with government contracts if Mr. Trump were to win re-election. In reality, the “businessmen” were undercover F.B.I. agents who reportedly recorded the exchange.
The sting operation was part of an F.B.I. investigation into Mr. Homan that the Trump administration quietly shut down this year. Mr. Homan himself denies any illegal actions. In a hearing on Tuesday, Attorney General Pam Bondi declined to answer questions about the money and said there was no evidence of wrongdoing.
I spent years investigating senior-level corruption and misconduct at the Department of Justice. In 2019, Mr. Trump appointed me inspector general at the Interior Department, a position I held until January, when he fired me and many of my counterparts in other departments. I am very worried that the apparent handoff is yet another star in the administration’s constellation of ethics problems.
We’ve seen Elon Musk and DOGE’s potential conflicts of interest. Mr. Trump’s meme coins that foreign business executives purchase to ingratiate themselves. The plane from the Qatari government given to the Trump administration. Suspicious pardons. The government has answered all these concerns with a dismissive wave of the hand.
Too often, Mr. Trump’s ethics flare-ups fade quickly. But I see glaring problems in the handling of Mr. Homan’s case that cry out for an independent investigation.
The first red flag is apparent enough: Mr. Homan and the White House gave inconsistent responses to the allegations. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, told reporters that Mr. Homan never took the money — a flat, categorical denial. Mr. Homan has said only that he did nothing wrong and nothing illegal. Notice the difference.
If Mr. Homan did not accept the bag of cash, why not just say so? Why fall back on a narrow denial about wrongdoing or illegality? Whose account is more credible?
The second red flag is even more alarming. When Mr. Trump took office, Mr. Homan was under F.B.I. investigation for bribery. And yet he went on to serve as a senior White House official, likely with a high security clearance. How did that happen?
Obtaining a security clearance is a rigorous process, particularly for senior officials. Investigators are supposed to scrutinize an applicant’s background, finances and potential vulnerabilities to influence. An active federal investigation for bribery should set off alarm bells, at the very least.
It appears that the allegations were known to those conducting Mr. Homan’s clearance and deemed unimportant. But it’s also possible that there was no security evaluation in the first place. On his first day in office, Mr. Trump allowed the White House to give interim security clearances to top officials without vetting them. Who knows how many senior officials didn’t undergo a background check?
Both possibilities are extremely troubling. Either the security clearance process failed in spectacular fashion or there’s a dangerous gap in the system designed to protect sensitive government information.
The third red flag is less obvious but no less significant: the tax implications. Believe it or not, the Internal Revenue Service requires individuals to report all income, even illegal income such as bribes. It may sound absurd, but it is the law.
If Mr. Homan did in fact accept a $50,000 payment, did he report it as income on his taxes? If not, that omission could conceivably constitute tax crime, a serious federal offense in its own right. Just ask Al Capone. Did the Justice Department and F.B.I. ever examine the potential tax violations as part of their inquiry? And if not, why not?
Individually, each of these issues — the inconsistent denials, the security clearance gap and the potential tax implications — warrants serious scrutiny. Taken together, they form a picture of misconduct. Democrats have opened two inquiries into the Homan affair. But to get the full picture, government watchdog agencies should begin a nonpartisan investigation.
This is not about Democrats or Republicans, Trump loyalists or Trump critics. No one wants a government in which officials accept cash bribes for government action. That is the stuff of banana republics or the type of Beltway swamp that Mr. Trump swore to drain.
Most Americans believe that senior government officials must be held to the highest ethical and legal standards. When allegations of bribery and corruption touch the upper echelons of government, the public deserves clarity.
Americans’ confidence in our government is at near-historic lows. Now is an opportunity to help restore trust with an unbiased and independent review.
Mark Lee Greenblatt investigated misconduct at the Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior. He is the former chair of the Council of Inspectors General.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.
The post The Tom Homan Affair Has More Red Flags Than a May Day Parade appeared first on New York Times.
