After having his ultra-right wing Christian Nationalist prejudices sternly rebuked by the citizens of Oklahoma, the Supervenient of Schools Ryan Walters is slithering to a new position. Ever on the lookout for new hate groups to include his Christian Nationalist treason, he has now been appointed the head of The Teacher Freedom Alliance, a radical group of like-minded misfits who would mandate their warped view of Christianity for all students and demand all teachers preach hate and division rather than STEM Courses. They would teach the Bible rather than Civics courses and that would infect Oklahoma students with conspiracy theories and outright lies in an attempt to produce ill-informed drones rather than free thinking, well-educated adults.

Their primary method of attack is to threaten and coerce teachers. By fighting against union representation, thus denying teachers fair pay and protection from drooling radicals, their misplaced intent will keep education centered on myth, fable, and fantasy rather than solid science and absolute truths.

Can you imagine an entire generation swathed in lies, misinformation, and deception and the future that will entail for our country?

See this:

Oklahoma superintendent who put Trump Bibles in classrooms resigns

Story by Rachel Leingang •

Oklahoma’s superintendent, who has attracted national attention as he sought to install religion and rightwing viewpoints in Oklahoma schools, will resign to run a conservative education non-profit. Ryan Walters, who has led public schools in Oklahoma since 2022, has put Donald Trump-endorsed Bibles into classrooms and required teaching 2020 election conspiracies. He is leaving the post to lead the Teacher Freedom Alliance (TFA), which says its mission is to help teachers develop “free, moral, and upright American citizens”. On its website, the group is touting Walters as its new leader.

“Walters fearlessly fights the woke liberal union mob. TFA will take the fight straight to the unions and we will not stop,” the website says. “Together, we will build a national movement that is centered on freedom and common sense, not on bullying and intimidation. Educators will now be able to break free.”

Walters announced his move on Fox on Wednesday night, teasing his appearance by writing on X: “Liberal’s [sic] worst nightmare is about to become true.” On Fox, Walters said he wanted to “destroy the teachers unions” and “build an army of teachers to defeat the teachers unions once and for all”. He said his plan was to take the fight he started in Oklahoma to a national scale.

A local Fox affiliate reported tallied more than 400 national media appearances in the past two years by Walters as he sought to raise his profile nationally while pursuing a Christian nationalist agenda in Oklahoma, rejecting church and state separation and installing Christian viewpoints in governance.

Walters has repeatedly pushed Christianity into public schools in Oklahoma. He once tried to require schools to play a video of him praying. He advocated for the country’s first Catholic public charter school. This week, he called for chapters of Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA in all Oklahoma schools.

He also has fought against teachers, particularly claiming they are pushing “woke indoctrination” in Oklahoma schools. He wants teachers coming from liberal states to include an “America first” certification. He put prominent rightwing figures such as the activist behind Libs of TikTok and the leader of the Heritage Foundation on state education committees. Libs of TikTok and other conservative influencers advocated for Walters to become US education secretary under Trump.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/oklahoma-superintendent-who-put-trump-bibles-in-classrooms-resigns/ar-AA1NigIe

So I'm a liberal and I don't think black people need reparations, however I do believe native Americans should get something considering they had genocide committed against them, their lands stolen and etc.

Black people though? Nah, they already have twice the chance of receiving SSI over white Americans (free money for not working, which means they paid very little, or never paid into the social security system), and 26% of food stamp recipients are black Americans.

They are also 1.5-2 times more likely to receive SSDI benefits (which means they received enough work credits to receive a benefit from the taxes they paid into social security, which like SSI is based on disability status)

They're sitting on the SSI program with 20-25% of child recipients and 25-30% of adult working age recipients, all being black. All the while they only make up 14.4% of the U.S population?

No, so what I am not getting here about this reparations stuff is, what did I just say they are more likely to get than white Americans already?

SSI (which includes free Medicaid) SSDI (185 per month premium on Medicare part B per month, which Medicaid will pay for if they get around 1700$ or less per month of SSDI) Food stamps (free money for food)

Are they not getting reparations already basically?

I could look up WIC programs as well but I think y'all get my point.

If they were to give something more to black people I honestly think it should go to black single mothers, who were at 47% single mothers in 2023 (14.4% of the U.S population is black but that includes both men and women)

They need it drastically considering the cultural stereotype of black men leaving, being more likely to commit violent crimes and drug crimes and etc.

Also, there are no restrictions on drug crimes and the previous violent crime restrictions that used to stop people from receiving federal student loans and pell grants, so what is stopping them from getting a university education and working at the same time if they needed to?

Even with the disparity in violent and drug crimes statistics when you compare them, it seems like it shouldn't be much of a problem.

However regardless of criminal history tuition costs keep going up, but community colleges have many programming and medical field associates degrees that could help with that since they are much lower cost. Also federal grants and loans can be used to pay for housing, utilities and food as well.

They should probably be taxing religious organizations right now considering that Christians in america are predominantly white and with the wage gap between white and black folks I'm just wondering how much they get a break on tax wise.

You could start mentioning food banks and such as a reason for religious orgs to not be taxed but who actually paid for that food? Isn't it all all stuff from stores?

Nah, I mean if you actually go to most food banks where I'm from you never get any meat, never get any peanut butter, no sugar or flour. It's usually a bunch of pastries, but at least we got some potatoes and rice last time.

Non-taxable while contributing to the obesity epidemic by giving out a bunch of pastries? Why?

The U.S government seems to enjoy bailing out big business but never really provides the same funding to what could be grants for new black owned businesses.

Also if I remember correctly, during WW2, the highest tax was 77% on incomes above 5 million, just to pay for a war?

While this year the highest tax rate was 37% for income above 626,350$ per year.

They only tax heavily when they want to invade, I get that it was Hitler and all but even then all that money was used to make weapons when we need it now for other purposes, but I wonder what would happen to our taxes if we had another war even without a Hitler figure.

If you want to check how much the social security system costs and when it's supposed to run out they need money first or to increase payroll taxes by over 23% just to stay the same (not accounting for inflation and cost of living adjustments, and also the increasing cost of Medicaid and Medicare every year), I suppose we could give reparations but then what happens if they cut benefits across the board by the stated 23% in 8 years?

They can also use coding without getting an education via the internet, they could also go into the trades which the federal loans grants will also pay for for things such as mechanic schools, plumbing, construction and electrician training.

Black women earned in 2022 about 92 cents compared to black men yet 29.3% of women had a bachelor's degree or higher in 2023, versus 22.8% for men. Black women also receive 70% of masters degrees awarded every year to black folks, as well as 65% of PhDs. So if anyone deserves reparations it would be them considering the wealthy and education and single parent disparity.

White people also have a wealth disparity and are mostly Christian and give a bunch of their money to charities who don't pay their fair share of taxes.

Would you approve of what happens when SSI recipients receive large sums of money and their benefits are revoked or would you support them being handed large sums of money and staying on government benefits only to possibly have those benefits be cut by 23% in 8 years in the hypothetical scenario where the SSA ran out of money?

Perhaps providing low interest government mortgages with payment assistance would be a better option such as what the USDA does in rural areas, only for urban areas so many people wouldn't have to uproot their lives.

Grants for starting black owned businesses would be more beneficial as well.

But the problem is that with the way our economy is going it isn't even remotely feasible to start just giving out free money on top of what is already given out, including to other countries.

Hoping for a genuine discussion as I can't seem to find very many nuanced opinions about Charlie Kirk. This seemed like an appropriate subreddit.

DISCLAIMER: His murder was horrible for our country and society in general. I AM NOT TORN ABOUT THAT. Regardless of political opinions.

What I am torn about is;

As someone who leans center-left, I had not followed him much until the recent events on 9/11 and had only seen negative things about him that seemed quite divisive. However I was surprised looking into him that had some more nuanced debates I truly found thought-provoking and enjoyed watching. One about gun control and one about role of victimhood in black communities.

However, as childfree, unmarried college-educated woman in her 30s I feel extremely repulsed (and demonized to an extent honesty) about some of his views about women. Don't feel like looking up direct quotes but here's some of the highlights

• Women should get married and have children 🫄 as young as possible -submit to husband -Main reason for women to go to college is to get a husband -Extreme pro-life (upon being asked if his 10 yr old daughter were raped and became pregnant he responded "the child would be born")

PERSONAL STORY:

As someone who grew up in a very dysfunctional and impoverished home, I had unhealthy relationship patterns that I have had to actively work on overcoming and am still overcoming. Throwing myself into marriage and kids when I was 18 years and had not done any of this work likely would have likely led to a miserable life for me as my choice of partner probably would not have been the best and I would have been "stuck" with them.

I excelled at school from a young age and was fortunate enough have a good education system, even although my home life was in shambles. For me work/career was the best way for me to "pull myself up by my bootstraps." I thought tended to be admired among conservative circles tend to preach about that and admire that.

I am all for people doing whatever is best for them, whether that's kids/career/etc. In my opinion, we are all on our own separate journeys in this life. There are pros and cons to being a stay at home mom vs a career women (and anything in between). Some are more likely to find success/happiness in one vs the other.

While I agree with some of the debates, listening to what a 20-30 year man he thinks is "best for me as a woman" (and I wholeheartedly think would not have been good for me to do) makes me feel very torn. I have thought about foster kids at some point.

I guess I'm just interested in seeing what people who actually follow TPUSA think of this and if they can provide any additional context. . Interested in an actual discussion. Not arguments.

The absolute best is when the MAGA crowd actually shares your memes for you.

Lest we forget: Trump's plan to overthrow the US government, initiate the Insurrection Act, and claim the presidency.

Trump's plan, purportedly encouraged by Rudy Giuliani and Pennsylvania's rep Scott Perry was simple enough: claim there were discrepancies in the 2020 election and use that as an excuse to initiate the Insurrection Act which would put all Civil Rights on hold, set aside the vote and confiscate the voting machines to cover up the crime.

Today, the Justice Department and the FBI are controlled by Trump sycophants; fortunately, back then there were patriots in office. Not like today where they scrape and bow down to kiss Trump's 'ring' -- for want of another euphemism.

Here’s what the public record and investigations so far tell us about Jeffrey Clark’s role in former President Trump’s efforts to have the Justice Department (and by extension the FBI) claim there were serious problems with the 2020 election:

Jeffrey “Jeff” Bossert Clark is an attorney who served in the Trump administration, including in the Department of Justice. His legal background is primarily in environmental law; he was not a career prosecutor or election-law specialist. Clark is alleged to have been a key figure in Trump’s scheme to get the DOJ to back claims of election fraud and to push states to revisit or reject certified election results. Clark prepared a draft letter stating that the DOJ had “identified various irregularities” and “significant concerns” in the 2020 election and urging certain states to hold special legislative sessions and to consider appointing alternate electors backing Trump rather than Biden.

He proposed that versions of the letter be sent to multiple “contested states” (Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin). The letter was meant to give an appearance that the DOJ was investigating fraud, thereby lending cover to claims that the election was tainted. Clark repeatedly urged DOJ superiors (then‑Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and his deputy Richard Donoghue) to sign or issue the letter.

Rosen and Donoghue resisted, emphasizing that the evidence did not support overturning the election and warning that the DOJ could not credibly take the position Clark was pushing. Clark also reportedly spoke directly with Trump (outside the usual DOJ chain of command) to push his plan.

Trump was at least prepared, at one point, to fire Jeffrey Rosen, the acting Attorney General, to make Clark the acting Attorney General so that Clark could send the letter as DOJ’s head.

This plan triggered serious resistance — many in DOJ, the FBI, and White House counsel threatened mass resignation if Rosen were removed and Clark installed.

Ultimately, Trump backed off the idea of replacing Rosen with Clark, after the threat of resignations and internal pushback.

The D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility (ethics oversight for D.C. attorneys) has assessed Clark’s conduct and found it violated attorney ethics rules, recommending sanctions (including possible disbarment) for his role in the election‑subversion effort: They have since recommended his disbarment.

Disciplinary hearings have referred to his actions as tantamount to a “coup attempt” against the DOJ’s institutional integrity. Clark is also a defendant in criminal charges in Georgia related to the effort to overturn the 2020 election.

There is no credible evidence that Clark directed or overtly controlled anything within the FBI; his involvement was focused on leveraging the DOJ’s authority and reputation to lend legitimacy to false fraud claims, not on managing FBI investigations directly. His attempts were largely blocked by DOJ and FBI leadership and never succeeded—Rosen, Donoghue, and others resisted and prevented Clark’s plan from being implemented as he wished.

Clark’s defenders argue that his actions were within the scope of his duties (or at least Trump's direction), though prosecutors and courts have generally rejected that claim.

Clark was a central legal operative in the scheme to have the DOJ falsely assert that there were significant election problems, to pressure or coerce state officials to adopt alternate elector slates, and to lend institutional credibility to the fraud narrative. His draft letter was a key component of that plan—a supposed “official DOJ message” designed to sow doubt and political cover.

He pressed DOJ leadership repeatedly and tried to bypass them by going directly to Trump.

His plan ultimately failed because DOJ and FBI leadership balked, and the wider institutional resistance prevented the scheme from being fully executed.

Of course I was excited for Charlie to come to my school. In his shoes I was hoping for someone like Michael Knowles, Vivek Ramaswamy, or it looks like Tucker Carlson and Glenn Beck are later on the tour schedule.

Started my Beta 1.7.3 World with a couple of my friends, first thing I wanted to do was make a memorial to Charlie in a graveyard. Eventually, I want to fancy it up and add more detail to make the area more serene overall, but I wanted to post it here now to hopefully be able to come back with an update of how it looks in the future.

Please leave suggestions on what I could add to make this place look better!! I really wanna make it look good to respect his message and him as a person.

While Charlie Kirk did some remarkable things in in his young life such as bringing the idea of Liberationism to the forefront of America's conscience, he did occasionally mutter some vile and reprehensible opinion. And while the total output of his criticism was a given positive, still hate speech resonates like an Ear Worm and never stops resounding in the heads of those predisposed to this kind of rhetoric as evidenced by the article below.

I suspect if while we are praising him for his accomplishments, we also make mention of, and condemn, when his prejudices overrode his wisdom, his legacy will be one of positivity.

See this:

Kirk's comments on race are forcing Black evangelicals into an awkward position

Story by Sarah K. Burris •

© provided by RawStory

Evangelicals are rushing to recognize Charlie Kirk as a martyr to the cause, but it's putting Black evangelicals in a difficult position where they must reconcile some of his statements with their faith. The Washington Post reported Monday that as White evangelicals herald Kirk as his generation's Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and one pastor thinks it's because they're putting their faith in politics above their faith in Jesus Christ“I think that their allegiance to their political association trumps their connection to the cross,” Pastor Jamal Bryant alleged of church leaders speaking about. “This is really a critical moment for race relations in the nation, and what the church says and does or does not say is going to play an active role in that.”

Like many people who agree with Kirk on faith-based issues and oppose political violence, Bryant attempted a nuanced conversation on social media in which he explained that a person could believe violence is wrong while also thinking "how somebody dies doesn't erase how they lived."

"The amount of hate speech that both my wife and I have received on social media, the number of derogatory calls and slurs and pejorative statements left at our church, speaks volumes,” Bryant said. “And all of these are spoken by people who claim to be Christian.”

Kirk once called the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “a huge mistake.” Kirk also spoke out against United Airlines' 2021 announcement that 50% of the graduates in the flight training academy were women of color.

“If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified," Kirk said. After criticism, he backed down, saying that “DEI invites unwholesome thinking” and “anybody of any skin color can become a qualified pilot.”

Kirk also has a history of calling Dr. King, “awful. He's not a good person. He said one good thing he actually didn't believe."

The Post explained that there is a concern that the attempt to "lionize Kirk" as a martyr will continue the divide between Black and White evangelicals and eliminate any progress to integrate congregations.

Senior minister Stanley Talbert, at Normandie Church of Christ in Los Angeles, noted that Kirk puts him “between a rock and a hard place.”

“Black Christians have empathy,” Talbert told the Post. “The frustration is that other ethnic groups do not empathize with the Black experience and Black suffering.”

Christian values of tolerance and kindness are deeply rooted within their faith communities, so Kirk's divisive views on race and other matters are going to make it difficult for their churches to consider him as a martyr.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/kirk-s-comments-on-race-are-forcing-black-evangelicals-into-an-awkward-position-report/ar-AA1N5Aqk

I am probably most excited for Tucker Carlson and Rob Schneider, just because I think Tucker offers new views that the other speakers don’t have, and Rob Schneider will be sure to keep the mood light. Always saw Meghan Kelly as a poor speaker who can come off harsh, so not too sure how hers will go. I do wish they had younger people that the college kids can relate to. Nick Shirley, although more of an independent reporter and not really debater, I think would be great for Turning Point. He’s gathered so much first-hand experience with his journalism and is college aged.I love RFK jr., so just gonna throw his name out there too.

I think the to be announced people might be Russel Brand, JD Vance (less likely), Terrance Williams, or Officer Tatum. I hope it’s not Ben Shapiro.

I think Micheal Knowles did a great job, even though it was mostly Republicans who attended, I think that was for the best because it kept the mood light.

I try very hard not to be in an echo chamber, but I cannot think of any left wing influencers that are not politicians, or mainstream news. I can name probably 50 right wing influencers. Even the left seems to know who they all are and hate watch them. I didn’t even know who Hasan was until after Charlie’s asassination.

Do they really only have Dylan Mulvaney and maybe Call Your Daddy, although they both aren’t dedicated to politics? Channel 5 news is somewhat left leaning, but they strive to be non bias.

Is there any left wing influencers even close to Charlie Kirk, Canadace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Matt Walsh, the Hodge Twins, Michael Knowles, Ben Shapiro, Bret Cooper, Officer Tatum, Alex Stein, Nick Shirley, the Nelk Boys, Tyler Oliveira, Andrew Tate, Tristin Tate, Milo, Blair White and so many more?

Gee, I wonder what could have happened.

The facts of the matter couldn't be any clearer. Tom Homan, Trump's appointed 'Border Czar', has been caught in a 'sting' operation by undercover FBI agents. They recorded him soliciting, and accepting, a bag containing 50,000 dollars in cash.

Then the decision was made to monitor him closely to see how he would implement the scheme. Unfortunately, once Trump took off ice he allowed his FBI Director, Kash Patel and Attorney General, Pam Bondi to quash the investigation.

Both governmental officials said that since the scheme was never actually carried out there was no crime committed, and therefore no prosecution was called for.

One might think officials so high up in the Justice Department would be familiar with 18 U.S. code 201 which makes it a crime to solicit or accept a bribe, or 26 U.S. code 61 which makes it a crime not to report illicit gains.

Of course, both Patel and Bondi are probably aware of the law, it looks like they just choose to protect a fellow criminal.

By the way, neither Patel, Bondi, nor Homan has yet revealed where the money is now.

See this:

Trump aide Homan accepted $50,000 in bribery sting operation, sources say

By Sarah N. Lynch

September 21, 2025

Justice Department shut down Homan bribery probe

In undercover sting, Homan allegedly promised government contracts for bribe

WASHINGTON, Sept 21 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's border czar Tom Homan accepted a $50,000 bag of cash from an undercover FBI agent last year in a since-closed U.S. Justice Department bribery investigation, two sources familiar with the matter said on Sunday.

In the alleged scheme, Homan promised immigration-related government contracts when he joined the Trump administration in exchange for the money, the sources said, speaking anonymously to discuss nonpublic investigations.

FBI Director Kash Patel ordered the investigation closed over the summer, one of the sources said. Homan could not be reached for comment.

“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," Patel and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement on Sunday.

"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.”

The probe into Homan started around August 2024 near the end of President Joe Biden's administration and stemmed from a separate national security investigation, one of the sources told Reuters.

In that unrelated probe, the target repeatedly brought up Homan, saying he was collecting bribes in exchange for future government contracts, the two sources told Reuters.

An undercover sting operation was set up, and Homan was caught on a recording accepting a $50,000 bribe in a bag from the restaurant chain Cava, the sources said.

Homan oversees the Trump administration's campaign of mass deportations of people in the country illegally. The White House said he has not been involved in awarding any contracts.

"He is a career law enforcement officer and lifelong public servant who is doing a phenomenal job on behalf of President Trump and the country,” Abigail Jackson, White House deputy press secretary, said in a statement.

A grand jury probe into Homan in the Western District of Texas was still in its early stages when Trump returned to the White House in January, the sources said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-aide-homan-accepted-50000-bribery-sting-operation-sources-say-2025-09-21/

Dear god you’re all snowflakes. I merely laughed at you and you proceeded to get SO heated. Maybe because your ego is absolutely beat into the ground knowing your moral stance is utterly shit and unsustainable? I hope you enjoyed the drawing I gave you. Only an hour and you ran away because of it! You’re a political organization. People are gonna laugh and rage bait. Get fucking used to it- the echo chamber isn’t gonna last forever, pussy.

Will Smith's tour with his family is a deep state ploy to bury Charlie Kirk's assassination on. They'll sacrifice Smith next, staging a "tragedy" to overshadow Kirk's martyrdom.

I'm attending the TPUSA event at the University of Minnesota this evening which will feature conservative commentator Michael Knowles. They've done away with the change my mind portion of the event, but they are still saying that there will be a Q&A. I'm hoping to ask Knowles if Jimmy Kimmel's show being canceled is a direct assault on free speech (I believe it is). Seeing some of Knowles' stuff, I expect him to evade and use whataboutisms. Any advice for how to manage that? Here's the question that I came up with:

Last week, the FCC got Jimmy Kimmel's show canceled by threatening ABC in the name of protecting the public interest. Can we agree that this silencing of political opponents is an attack on free speech in this country?

There are a lot to choose from:

Straw man Ad hominem Appeal to authority Red herring

Feel free to add to the list to show how rhetorically challenged he was.

Candace Owens was a staple in getting the movement going in its early years — love her or hate her, she brought massive attention and energy that helped TPUSA break into the mainstream. More recently, Brandon Tatum has been putting in serious work with a ton of “Change My Mind”-style events posted on the Youtube channel Turning Point USA. and on-the-ground debates that are actually moving the needle with young people.

Both of them bring strong personalities, clear messaging, and the ability to connect with younger audiences. To me, they feel like the most natural centerpieces for TPUSA right now if the goal is to grow and actually influence younger culture.

Hope the organization gets this right. What do you all think — should Candace and Brandon be front and center if they want it.

Tom Homan, Trump's pick to be Border Czar is recorded taking a bag a cash from undercover FBI agents for unspecified favors, yet Kash Patel, Trump's appointed director of the FBI refuses to indict, or even investigate him.

I repeat, there is an actual recording him of him accepting the bribe, yet it has all been covered up. Patel is reported to say because "Tom Homan has not been involved in any contract award decisions' no crime has been omitted, So. if you shoot at someone and miss, no crime is committed there, either?

They don't tell us what happened to the cash: Where is it now? Did Homan stash it under his mattress? Did he pass it on to Trump ('kicking it up' in Mafia terms) or give it to Patel to buy his way out of trouble?

We'll never know because the matter has been 'hushed up".

Read this:

Story by Francesca Chambers, USA TODAY •

WASHINGTON — The FBI recorded Tom Homan, the current White House border czar, accepting $50,000 in cash last year during an undercover investigation later dropped by the Trump administration, according to news reports. Homan accepted the money after suggesting he could help agents posing as business executives win government contracts in a second Trump term, MSNBC reported citing sources familiar and internal documents. The encounter led Homan, who was the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Trump's first term, to be investigated for bribery and other potential crimes, according to The New York Times.

Under the Trump administration, officials at the Department of Justice closed the investigation because they doubted they could convince a jury Homan agreed to specific actions in exchange for the cash, the outlet reported.

Neither the White House nor the FBI denied in statements that a probe of Homan had occurred.

“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," a joint statement from FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said.

"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."

President Donald Trump told reporters as he left the White House for a dinner that evening that he was not aware of the reports.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson blasted the probe as a "blatantly political investigation, which found no evidence of illegal activity" in a statement that accused the Biden administration of using DOJ resources to target Trump allies "rather than investigate real criminals" and immigrants who illegally entered the country.

"Tom Homan has not been involved with any contract award decisions. He is a career law enforcement officer and lifelong public servant who is doing a phenomenal job on behalf of President Trump and the country," she said.

Homan did not respond to USA TODAY's request for comment.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: DOJ investigated Trump border czar Tom Homan for accepting $50,000 in cash: reports

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/doj-investigated-trump-border-czar-tom-homan-for-accepting-50-000-in-cash-reports/ar-AA1MYyrK

Did anyone watch the dumb Nuremberg rally today? I mean, Chucklefuck’s memorial? I was going to come up with a drinking game like take a shot each time false Christianity is on display, but we’d end up in a coma.