This weekend, the corporate press went into meltdown mode after ABC’s George Stephanopoulos had a tense, combative exchange with Vice President JD Vance over reports that border czar Tom Homan took a “bribe” before taking his current post. Stephanopoulos came off more like a Democratic operative with a microphone than a journalist, bristling at Vance’s refusal to be boxed in by his loaded questions.
The media class, of course, rushed to praise George for “holding Vance accountable,” when in reality, he simply cut off the interview the moment Vance pushed back effectively.
Vance was, in fact, answering the questions directly and in full, but Stephanopoulos simply didn’t like the answers—because they didn’t fit his prepackaged narrative. The moment Vance pushed back with facts instead of left-approved talking points, George’s composure cracked.
Here are Vance’s responses before Stephanopoulos cut him off mid-sentence—the part they didn’t want viewers to actually hear:
“Tom Homan did not take a bribe. It’s a ridiculous smear.”
“George, this story has been covered ad nauseum. He did not take a bribe.”
“There’s absolutely no evidence that Tom Homan has ever taken a bribe, or done anything illegal.”
“Nobody has accused Tom of violating a crime, even the far-left media like yourself. So I’m actually not sure what the precise question is. Did he accept $50,000? Honestly, George, I don’t know the answer to that question. What I do know is that he didn’t violate a crime.”
The narrative being peddled by the press is that Vance was evasive and dodging questions — which is pure nonsense, as his actual responses make painfully clear. The only thing he was “guilty” of was refusing to play along with a manufactured smear campaign.
This whole charge against Tom Homan isn’t rooted in a single shred of credible evidence. It’s political theater — a desperate attempt by the media to create controversy where none exists.
And if you need proof, just look at Stephanopoulos’s own approach. His line of questioning practically mirrors the same lazy, copy-and-paste talking points being circulated throughout the press corps:
“Tom Homan was recorded on an FBI surveillance tape in September 2024 accepting $50,000 in cash.”
“Did he accept the $50,000 that was caught on the surveillance tape?
“He was recorded on an audiotape in September 2024, an FBI surveillance tape, accepting $50,000 in cash.”
“What was caught on the tape, you’re saying right now, you don’t know whether or not he kept that money?”
“I asked you whether Tom Homan accepted $50,000, as was heard on an audiotape recorded by the FBI in September 2024. And you did not answer the question.”
To really get to the bottom of this so-called “scandal,” let’s lay out the facts — or rather, the lack of them. This isn’t about some nuanced legal technicality or wordplay to claim innocence. The core issue is simple: no one can actually produce the proof for the accusations they’re so confidently shouting from the rooftops.
Here’s what’s being alleged: supposedly, the FBI set up a sting operation to target Tom Homan last summer. (And notice the deafening silence from the same media that once screeched about “weaponization of government” — so long as it wasn’t Biden’s DOJ targeting Trump’s allies.) According to the story, undercover agents posed as security industry executives interested in immigration policy, paid Homan $50,000 in cash, and conveniently placed it in a Cava restaurant take-out bag. The exchange, they say, was recorded, and the FBI was supposedly waiting for Homan to send back government contracts to “prove” it was a bribe.
Sounds scandalous on paper — until you look at the details. Homan was working as a private consultant at the time. Consulting deals, even with cash involved, are not uncommon in that world. And the claim that he could have issued or steered contracts is flat-out bogus — in his position then, he had no authority to award government work. The entire premise falls apart the second you apply even a hint of scrutiny.
Now, this is where the real questions start piling up — and where the so-called “evidence” begins to crumble under its own weight.
According to the conflicting reports, this alleged handoff was either captured on video or only on audio. Which is it? Because that detail matters. If it’s just an audio recording, how on earth do we know about the Cava restaurant take-out bag supposedly being used to pass the money — unless someone literally said it out loud on tape? That would be a ridiculously clumsy way to stage a bribe, almost like someone wanted to make sure that particular “detail” made it into the narrative.
But here’s the biggest problem — and it’s fatal to the entire story: no one has actually seen or heard this supposed recording. Not the press, not Congress, not even anonymous “sources familiar with the matter.” Nothing. Just rumors being recycled through the same echo chamber that brought us “Russian collusion” and every other political fantasy of the last decade.
And that brings us to the origin of this mess. The “scoop” first appeared in an MSNBC segment co-written by Ken Dilanian and Carol Leonnig — yes, that Ken Dilanian, the one with a well-documented history of running cover for the intel community and pushing deep state disinformation. He was knee-deep in the Russia hoax, and his byline alone is enough to send any story straight to the “believe-it-when-I-see-it” file.
This MSNBC report claims “The FBI recorded Tom Homan, now the White House border czar, accepting $50,000 in cash after indicating he could help the agents — who were posing as business executives — win government contracts in a second Trump administration.” Numerous other outlets quickly confirmed this story using anonymous sources, indicating that the same sources had reached out to multiple reporters with similar leaks.
The New York Times has developed its own verification process. Similarly, Reuters has produced reports and appears to be the source of the information regarding the Cava bag. However, the evolution of this story raises many questions. In an original report, MSNBC stated unequivocally that a video recording was made: “On Sept. 20, 2024, with hidden cameras recording the scene at a meeting spot in Texas.” Recently, though, this detail has changed; various outlets, including the New York Times, now refer to the recording as an audio recording: “The Times has reported that Mr. Homan was recorded on audiotape during a meeting with agents.”
For all the breathless headlines and smug declarations that Tom Homan was “caught” taking a bribe, there’s one glaring fact that every so-called journalist seems to be ignoring: not a single reporter has actually seen or heard these alleged recordings. Not one. From the moment this story “broke” to George Stephanopoulos puffing his chest on Sunday, the evidence remains entirely phantom — endlessly referenced, never revealed.
The original MSNBC “exclusive” is a textbook case of narrative engineering — a story spoon-fed to the press by anonymous insiders eager to shape the political conversation. It reeks of leaked deep-state gossip, not verified reporting. And when you look closely at the fine print, both reporters — Ken Dilanian and Carol Leonnig — admit that they never saw or heard the supposed surveillance tape. They merely read about it.
From this point forward, keep your eyes on every member of the press who insists that this mysterious “tape” exists. Until someone — anyone — actually comes forward and says they’ve seen or heard the evidence themselves, every single one of them is peddling fraudulent reporting.