This piece breaks down claims from Jonathan Karl’s new book about why Donald Trump picked Kristi Noem for the Department of Homeland Security, the role Corey Lewandowski played, and the security and political questions that followed. It covers the reported personal ties between Noem and Lewandowski, how advisors reacted, and the memo and fallout involving DHS officials. The intent here is to lay out the facts, the direct quotes, and the angles conservatives should weigh without glossing over real concerns.
Corey Lewandowski first surfaced as a major Trump adviser during the 2016 campaign and was later pushed out at the urging of Jared and Ivanka Kushner. His return to Trump’s orbit has been noisy and controversial, tied to a reputation for being fiery and often unpredictable. He was arrested in 2016 after an altercation with a reporter, though charges were dropped, and he has remained a polarizing figure ever since.
Kristi Noem’s rise was steady: she served four terms in the U.S. House before becoming South Dakota governor in 2018, and she ran on a platform that emphasized family values. She has been married to Bryon since 1992 and they have three children together, a fact her campaign stressed when controversies surfaced. Noem’s public image has leaned into visible fieldwork, earning her attention and the nickname “ICE Barbie” among observers who follow border policy closely.
Reports surfaced that an alleged affair between Noem and Lewandowski dated back to 2019, a claim both have denied while remaining married to their respective spouses. The allegation was highlighted in a September 2023 report, and both parties have publicly rejected the claim. Whatever the truth, the rumor became a talking point inside Republican circles and shaped perceptions about motives and loyalties.
Jonathan Karl’s book argues that Trump’s choice to nominate Noem for DHS surprised even senior aides because she was not on the transition team’s shortlist. Karl recounts Trump saying, “I did it for Corey,” and adding, “It’s the only thing Corey asked me for.” That exact line, if accurately reported, paints the decision as driven by personal loyalty rather than a traditional vetting of experience for a department that handles national security.
Inside the administration, figures like Steve Bannon openly questioned the pick, pointing to Noem’s lack of law enforcement experience at a time when DHS oversees critical security operations. The pushback wasn’t polite disagreement; it reflected a deeper worry that expertise was being sidelined. For conservatives who prioritize secure borders and capable leadership, that kind of internal dissent matters.
DHS Chief Security Officer Richard McComb reportedly raised red flags about Lewandowski’s suitability for top-secret clearance, citing foreign financial ties and an ongoing criminal probe. After submitting a memo listing more than a dozen issues, McComb was removed from his post after nearly a decade of service, a move that invited scrutiny about whether his ouster was unrelated or retaliatory. Those developments add a layer of personnel and process concern alongside the political drama.
“President Trump selected the best and most qualified individuals to serve in his cabinet and work on behalf of the American people,” said spokesperson Abigail Jackson. That line has been used to push back against accusations of favoritism, and it represents the administration’s broader defense of personnel moves. Still, when questions about hiring and security clearance intersect, blanket reassurances often fail to settle skeptics.
Lewandowski’s official role has been described as a special government employee advising DHS, with some insiders suggesting he functions as an unofficial chief of staff. His undefined “envoy” status and a history described by one defense contractor as a grenade ready to explode after a few drinks raise legitimate concerns about how influence is exercised behind closed doors. Even veterans returning to a campaign need clear responsibilities and accountability when national security is involved.
There’s also a political angle to consider: some observers, as noted in Alex Isenstadt’s work, speculate that the rumored relationship with Lewandowski might have cost Noem a chance at being the 2024 running mate. Personal scandals or even persistent gossip can carry real political costs, shaping who earns public trust and opportunities. For conservatives, balancing loyalty to allies with the practical demands of governance is a conversation that matters now more than ever.
At the center of the debate is a tough question: how much should personal loyalty influence cabinet picks when national security is at stake? Noem’s DHS tenure has been defended by the White House with references to border and deportation results, but the backstory of her appointment raises procedural and ethical questions. That tension between outsider loyalty and institutional competence is one Republicans should face candidly as they weigh leadership choices moving forward.
