House Democrats are stirring the pot again, targeting President Trump’s son-in-law, Michael Boulos, with a probe that smells like political theater.
The Hill reported that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, led by Democrats, is digging into allegations that Boulos tried to cash in on his Trump family ties.
In June 2022, Boulos, his cousin James Frangi, and Saudi businessman Abdulelah Allam allegedly discussed a deal involving a $100,000 payment. The arrangement supposedly promised Allam the appearance of cozying up to the Trump family, with an invitation to Boulos’ wedding to Tiffany Trump as the bait.
Democrats are framing this as a scandal, but the details are murkier than a swamp in Mar-a-Lago. The New York Times, ever eager to sling mud at Trump’s orbit, reported that Boulos and Frangi pitched the wedding invite for cash.
All three men—Boulos, Frangi, and Allam—have pushed back, calling the reporting false or misleading. Text messages between Frangi and Allam allegedly back the Times’ story, but conflicting accounts muddy the waters.
The wedding in question, between Boulos and Tiffany Trump, took place on November 12, 2022, at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
President Trump and family were in attendance, but Allam, despite the alleged deal, didn’t show up. Democrats are now demanding bank records and communications to sniff out whether this was a pay-to-play scheme.
Boulos’ spokesperson claims Frangi owed him money, and Allam’s payment was just settling a debt between cousins. Allam’s side calls it a loan to Boulos, while Frangi waffles, describing it as both a loan and a debt settlement. The inconsistency raises eyebrows, but it’s hard to see this as anything more than a family financial tangle being spun into a conspiracy.
House Oversight ranking member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) didn’t hold back, claiming, “This revelation, if accurate, would represent a corrupt and reckless attempt by the Trump family to leverage proximity to Donald Trump for personal enrichment.”
That’s a bold accusation, but it assumes guilt before evidence. Garcia’s rhetoric sounds like a progressive fishing expedition, not a quest for truth.
Garcia also stated, “The Committee demands to understand the details of this arrangement and whether you are continuing to leverage your position to sell access to President Trump.”
It’s a juicy soundbite, but the lack of concrete evidence makes it feel like a political jab. The Committee’s demand for documents, including those tied to Allam’s potential wedding attendance, suggests they’re grasping at straws.
Frangi reportedly texted about plans to “soften up” Saudi officials by flaunting Allam’s supposed closeness to the Trump family. That sounds damning, but without clear proof of funds changing hands for influence, it’s just spicy gossip. The Times’ reliance on text messages might not hold up under scrutiny if all parties dispute the narrative.
Allam, who had property assets seized by the Saudi government in 2017, might have his own motives for cozying up to powerful figures. However, pinning this to U.S. foreign policy influence feels like a stretch without hard evidence. Democrats’ zeal to paint this as a national security threat seems more like partisan posturing than principled concern.
“The Committee is further concerned by the conflicting explanations provided about the purpose of this $100,000 payment,” Garcia said. Fair enough, but the conflicting stories could just as easily point to sloppy bookkeeping as to corruption. The conservative take: this looks like another attempt to smear Trump’s family with innuendo rather than facts.
Garcia went further, warning, “These actions raise serious questions about whether corrupt financial interests are influencing American policy and whether President Trump is for sale to those willing to pay.”
That’s a serious charge, but it’s hard to take seriously when the same Committee ignored similar concerns about Hunter Biden’s dealings under a Democratic president. Hypocrisy cuts both ways, congressman.
The probe is part of a broader pattern of Oversight investigations into presidential families. Democrats previously scrutinized Trump and his children, like Jared Kushner’s $2 billion Saudi deal after leaving office. Meanwhile, Republicans under Biden went after Hunter Biden’s finances, showing both sides love a good family feud when it suits their agenda.
None of the men involved—Boulos, Frangi, or Allam—responded to The Hill’s requests for comment, leaving the story in a haze of he-said, she-said.
The Committee’s push for bank records might clarify things, but don’t hold your breath for a smoking gun. This feels more like a show trial to keep the anti-Trump base fired up.