ReportWire

Tag: Letitia James

  • U.S. prosecutors pursue new criminal probe into New York AG Letitia James over financial transactions

    Federal prosecutors have launched a new criminal investigation into New York Attorney General Letitia James, after a grand jury previously declined to indict her twice on unrelated criminal charges, two sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.

    The new probe, which is in its early stages, marks the latest effort by the Justice Department to target one of President Trump’s perceived political enemies, after she pursued a civil fraud case against him while he was out of power.

    The latest investigation, which was first reported by the New York Times, centers on financial transactions between James and her long-time hairdresser Iyesata Marsh, the sources said.

    Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, speaks outside federal court in Norfolk, Virginia, on Friday, Oct. 24, 2025.

    Eric Lee / Bloomberg via Getty Images


    A grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted James last fall over charges that she had defrauded a financial institution in order to secure a better interest rate on a property she purchased in Norfork.

    The case was dismissed in November, however, after a federal judge ruled that Lindsey Halligan, the U.S. attorney who solely secured the indictment, was unlawfully appointed. 

    The Justice Department later tried again and twice failed to secure new indictments in the case against her, and late last year, the department appealed the ruling that disqualified Halligan. 

    James’ attorney Abbe Lowell has previously accused the Justice Department of vindictive prosecution, saying she was being unlawfully targeted because of Mr. Trump’s animus towards her.

    “Clearly frustrated by the string of failures in carrying out President Trump’s political vendetta against Attorney General James, his obedient Justice Department appears to be using its vast resources to try to shake down people based on their association with Ms. James,” Lowell said in a statement to CBS News. “Like their earlier attempts, this attack on Ms. James is doomed to fail. The desperation of those working for Trump is palpable and makes indelible the stain already put on this Justice Department. This abuse of justice must end.”

    CBS News could not immediately determine what kinds of potential crimes are being investigated in the latest probe.

    Prosecutors are asking questions about money that James has loaned Marsh over the years, one of the sources added. 

    Last month, Marsh was indicted in the Western District of Louisiana on charges of bank fraud and aggravated identity theft in connection with a 2019 purchase of a Land Rover. 

    Marsh’s attorney, Keith Whiddon, declined to comment. 

    The new investigation is being jointly led by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Western District of Louisiana and the Northern District of New York, one of the sources said.

    John Sarcone, the acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York, has also separately been overseeing two other probes into James and her office’s handling of the civil fraud investigation into Mr. Trump and a lawsuit filed by her office against the National Rifle Association and executives there.

    His role in all three of those probes, however, is now in question, after a federal judge earlier on Thursday disqualified him from serving as acting U.S. attorney, saying he was not serving lawfully in his position.

    In doing so, the judge found he could not be involved in the handling of the separate probes related to the civil fraud investigation and the NRA.

    James sought to challenge his authority to preside over the cases after she was subpoenaed in August. As part of his ruling, the judge also quashed the subpoenas.

    Source link

  • Zohran Mamdani sworn in as New York City mayor at historic subway station

    Zohran Mamdani became mayor of New York City just after midnight Thursday, taking the oath of office at an historic, decommissioned subway station in Manhattan.Mamdani, a Democrat, was sworn in as the first Muslim leader of America’s biggest city, placing his hand on a Quran as he took his oath.“This is truly the honor and the privilege of a lifetime,” Mamdani said in a brief speech.The ceremony, administered by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a political ally, took place at the old City Hall station, one of the city’s original subway stops that is known for its stunning arched ceilings.In Mamdani’s first speech as mayor, he said the old subway station was a “testament to the importance of public transit to the vitality, the health and the legacy of our city” as he announced the appointment of his new Department of Transportation commissioner, Mike Flynn.The new mayor then closed: “Thank you all so much, now I will see you later,” he said with a smile before heading up a flight of stairs.Mamdani will be sworn in again, in grander style, in a public ceremony at City Hall at 1 p.m. by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of the mayor’s political heroes. That will be followed by what the new administration is billing as a public block party on a stretch of Broadway known as the “Canyon of Heroes,” famous for its ticker-tape parades.Mamdani now begins one of the most unrelenting jobs in American politics as one of the country’s most-watched politicians.In addition to being the city’s first Muslim mayor, Mamdani is also its first of South Asian descent and the first to be born in Africa. At 34, Mamdani is also the city’s youngest mayor in generations.In a campaign that helped make “affordability” a buzzword across the political spectrum, the democratic socialist promised to bring transformative change with policies intended to lower the cost of living in one of the world’s most expensive cities. His platform included free child care, free buses, a rent freeze for about 1 million households, and a pilot of city-run grocery stores.But he will also have to face other responsibilities: handling trash and snow and rats, while getting blamed for subway delays and potholes.Mamdani was born in Kampala, Uganda, the son of filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, an academic and author. His family moved to New York City when he was 7, with Mamdani growing up in a post-9/11 city where Muslims didn’t always feel welcome. He became an American citizen in 2018.He worked on political campaigns for Democratic candidates in the city before he sought public office himself, winning a state Assembly seat in 2020 to represent a section of Queens.Mamdani and his wife, Rama Duwaji, will depart their one-bedroom, rent stabilized apartment in the outer-borough to take up residence in the stately mayoral residence in Manhattan.Mamdani inherits a city on the upswing, after years of slow recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Violent crime has dropped to pre-pandemic lows. Tourists are back. Unemployment, which soared during the pandemic years, is also back to pre-COVID levels.Yet deep concerns remain about high prices and rising rents in the city.He’ll also have to deal with Republican President Donald Trump.During the mayoral race, Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from the city if Mamdani won and mused about sending National Guard troops to the city.But Trump surprised supporters and foes alike by inviting the Democrat to the White House for what ended up being a cordial meeting in November.“I want him to do a great job and will help him do a great job,” Trump said.Still, tensions between the two leaders are almost certain to resurface, given their deep policy disagreements, particularly over immigration.Mamdani also faces skepticism and opposition from some members of the city’s Jewish community over his criticisms of Israel’s government.The new mayor and his team have spent the weeks since his election victory preparing for the transition, surrounding Mamdani with seasoned hands who have worked inside or alongside city government.That included persuading the city’s police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, to remain in her position — a move that helped calm fears in the business community that the administration might be planning radical changes in policing strategy.

    Zohran Mamdani became mayor of New York City just after midnight Thursday, taking the oath of office at an historic, decommissioned subway station in Manhattan.

    Mamdani, a Democrat, was sworn in as the first Muslim leader of America’s biggest city, placing his hand on a Quran as he took his oath.

    “This is truly the honor and the privilege of a lifetime,” Mamdani said in a brief speech.

    The ceremony, administered by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a political ally, took place at the old City Hall station, one of the city’s original subway stops that is known for its stunning arched ceilings.

    In Mamdani’s first speech as mayor, he said the old subway station was a “testament to the importance of public transit to the vitality, the health and the legacy of our city” as he announced the appointment of his new Department of Transportation commissioner, Mike Flynn.

    The new mayor then closed: “Thank you all so much, now I will see you later,” he said with a smile before heading up a flight of stairs.

    Mamdani will be sworn in again, in grander style, in a public ceremony at City Hall at 1 p.m. by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of the mayor’s political heroes. That will be followed by what the new administration is billing as a public block party on a stretch of Broadway known as the “Canyon of Heroes,” famous for its ticker-tape parades.

    Mamdani now begins one of the most unrelenting jobs in American politics as one of the country’s most-watched politicians.

    In addition to being the city’s first Muslim mayor, Mamdani is also its first of South Asian descent and the first to be born in Africa. At 34, Mamdani is also the city’s youngest mayor in generations.

    In a campaign that helped make “affordability” a buzzword across the political spectrum, the democratic socialist promised to bring transformative change with policies intended to lower the cost of living in one of the world’s most expensive cities. His platform included free child care, free buses, a rent freeze for about 1 million households, and a pilot of city-run grocery stores.

    But he will also have to face other responsibilities: handling trash and snow and rats, while getting blamed for subway delays and potholes.

    Mamdani was born in Kampala, Uganda, the son of filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, an academic and author. His family moved to New York City when he was 7, with Mamdani growing up in a post-9/11 city where Muslims didn’t always feel welcome. He became an American citizen in 2018.

    He worked on political campaigns for Democratic candidates in the city before he sought public office himself, winning a state Assembly seat in 2020 to represent a section of Queens.

    Mamdani and his wife, Rama Duwaji, will depart their one-bedroom, rent stabilized apartment in the outer-borough to take up residence in the stately mayoral residence in Manhattan.

    Mamdani inherits a city on the upswing, after years of slow recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Violent crime has dropped to pre-pandemic lows. Tourists are back. Unemployment, which soared during the pandemic years, is also back to pre-COVID levels.

    Yet deep concerns remain about high prices and rising rents in the city.

    He’ll also have to deal with Republican President Donald Trump.

    During the mayoral race, Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from the city if Mamdani won and mused about sending National Guard troops to the city.

    But Trump surprised supporters and foes alike by inviting the Democrat to the White House for what ended up being a cordial meeting in November.

    “I want him to do a great job and will help him do a great job,” Trump said.

    Still, tensions between the two leaders are almost certain to resurface, given their deep policy disagreements, particularly over immigration.

    Mamdani also faces skepticism and opposition from some members of the city’s Jewish community over his criticisms of Israel’s government.

    The new mayor and his team have spent the weeks since his election victory preparing for the transition, surrounding Mamdani with seasoned hands who have worked inside or alongside city government.

    That included persuading the city’s police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, to remain in her position — a move that helped calm fears in the business community that the administration might be planning radical changes in policing strategy.

    Source link

  • Zohran Mamdani sworn in as New York City mayor at historic subway station

    Zohran Mamdani became mayor of New York City just after midnight Thursday, taking the oath of office at an historic, decommissioned subway station in Manhattan.Mamdani, a Democrat, was sworn in as the first Muslim leader of America’s biggest city, placing his hand on a Quran as he took his oath.“This is truly the honor and the privilege of a lifetime,” Mamdani said in a brief speech.The ceremony, administered by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a political ally, took place at the old City Hall station, one of the city’s original subway stops that is known for its stunning arched ceilings.In Mamdani’s first speech as mayor, he said the old subway station was a “testament to the importance of public transit to the vitality, the health and the legacy of our city” as he announced the appointment of his new Department of Transportation commissioner, Mike Flynn.The new mayor then closed: “Thank you all so much, now I will see you later,” he said with a smile before heading up a flight of stairs.Mamdani will be sworn in again, in grander style, in a public ceremony at City Hall at 1 p.m. by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of the mayor’s political heroes. That will be followed by what the new administration is billing as a public block party on a stretch of Broadway known as the “Canyon of Heroes,” famous for its ticker-tape parades.Mamdani now begins one of the most unrelenting jobs in American politics as one of the country’s most-watched politicians.In addition to being the city’s first Muslim mayor, Mamdani is also its first of South Asian descent and the first to be born in Africa. At 34, Mamdani is also the city’s youngest mayor in generations.In a campaign that helped make “affordability” a buzzword across the political spectrum, the democratic socialist promised to bring transformative change with policies intended to lower the cost of living in one of the world’s most expensive cities. His platform included free child care, free buses, a rent freeze for about 1 million households, and a pilot of city-run grocery stores.But he will also have to face other responsibilities: handling trash and snow and rats, while getting blamed for subway delays and potholes.Mamdani was born in Kampala, Uganda, the son of filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, an academic and author. His family moved to New York City when he was 7, with Mamdani growing up in a post-9/11 city where Muslims didn’t always feel welcome. He became an American citizen in 2018.He worked on political campaigns for Democratic candidates in the city before he sought public office himself, winning a state Assembly seat in 2020 to represent a section of Queens.Mamdani and his wife, Rama Duwaji, will depart their one-bedroom, rent stabilized apartment in the outer-borough to take up residence in the stately mayoral residence in Manhattan.Mamdani inherits a city on the upswing, after years of slow recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Violent crime has dropped to pre-pandemic lows. Tourists are back. Unemployment, which soared during the pandemic years, is also back to pre-COVID levels.Yet deep concerns remain about high prices and rising rents in the city.He’ll also have to deal with Republican President Donald Trump.During the mayoral race, Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from the city if Mamdani won and mused about sending National Guard troops to the city.But Trump surprised supporters and foes alike by inviting the Democrat to the White House for what ended up being a cordial meeting in November.“I want him to do a great job and will help him do a great job,” Trump said.Still, tensions between the two leaders are almost certain to resurface, given their deep policy disagreements, particularly over immigration.Mamdani also faces skepticism and opposition from some members of the city’s Jewish community over his criticisms of Israel’s government.The new mayor and his team have spent the weeks since his election victory preparing for the transition, surrounding Mamdani with seasoned hands who have worked inside or alongside city government.That included persuading the city’s police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, to remain in her position — a move that helped calm fears in the business community that the administration might be planning radical changes in policing strategy.

    Zohran Mamdani became mayor of New York City just after midnight Thursday, taking the oath of office at an historic, decommissioned subway station in Manhattan.

    Mamdani, a Democrat, was sworn in as the first Muslim leader of America’s biggest city, placing his hand on a Quran as he took his oath.

    “This is truly the honor and the privilege of a lifetime,” Mamdani said in a brief speech.

    The ceremony, administered by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a political ally, took place at the old City Hall station, one of the city’s original subway stops that is known for its stunning arched ceilings.

    In Mamdani’s first speech as mayor, he said the old subway station was a “testament to the importance of public transit to the vitality, the health and the legacy of our city” as he announced the appointment of his new Department of Transportation commissioner, Mike Flynn.

    The new mayor then closed: “Thank you all so much, now I will see you later,” he said with a smile before heading up a flight of stairs.

    Mamdani will be sworn in again, in grander style, in a public ceremony at City Hall at 1 p.m. by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of the mayor’s political heroes. That will be followed by what the new administration is billing as a public block party on a stretch of Broadway known as the “Canyon of Heroes,” famous for its ticker-tape parades.

    Mamdani now begins one of the most unrelenting jobs in American politics as one of the country’s most-watched politicians.

    In addition to being the city’s first Muslim mayor, Mamdani is also its first of South Asian descent and the first to be born in Africa. At 34, Mamdani is also the city’s youngest mayor in generations.

    In a campaign that helped make “affordability” a buzzword across the political spectrum, the democratic socialist promised to bring transformative change with policies intended to lower the cost of living in one of the world’s most expensive cities. His platform included free child care, free buses, a rent freeze for about 1 million households, and a pilot of city-run grocery stores.

    But he will also have to face other responsibilities: handling trash and snow and rats, while getting blamed for subway delays and potholes.

    Mamdani was born in Kampala, Uganda, the son of filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, an academic and author. His family moved to New York City when he was 7, with Mamdani growing up in a post-9/11 city where Muslims didn’t always feel welcome. He became an American citizen in 2018.

    He worked on political campaigns for Democratic candidates in the city before he sought public office himself, winning a state Assembly seat in 2020 to represent a section of Queens.

    Mamdani and his wife, Rama Duwaji, will depart their one-bedroom, rent stabilized apartment in the outer-borough to take up residence in the stately mayoral residence in Manhattan.

    Mamdani inherits a city on the upswing, after years of slow recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Violent crime has dropped to pre-pandemic lows. Tourists are back. Unemployment, which soared during the pandemic years, is also back to pre-COVID levels.

    Yet deep concerns remain about high prices and rising rents in the city.

    He’ll also have to deal with Republican President Donald Trump.

    During the mayoral race, Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from the city if Mamdani won and mused about sending National Guard troops to the city.

    But Trump surprised supporters and foes alike by inviting the Democrat to the White House for what ended up being a cordial meeting in November.

    “I want him to do a great job and will help him do a great job,” Trump said.

    Still, tensions between the two leaders are almost certain to resurface, given their deep policy disagreements, particularly over immigration.

    Mamdani also faces skepticism and opposition from some members of the city’s Jewish community over his criticisms of Israel’s government.

    The new mayor and his team have spent the weeks since his election victory preparing for the transition, surrounding Mamdani with seasoned hands who have worked inside or alongside city government.

    That included persuading the city’s police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, to remain in her position — a move that helped calm fears in the business community that the administration might be planning radical changes in policing strategy.

    Source link

  • Justice Department again fails to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James, AP sources say – WTOP News

    A grand jury declined for a second time to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James on Thursday, refusing to resurrect a mortgage fraud prosecution encouraged by President Donald Trump, according to a person familiar with the matter.

    FILE – New York Attorney General, Letitia James, speaks after pleading not guilty outside the United States District Court Oct. 24, 2025, in Norfolk, Va. (AP Photo/John Clark, File)(AP/John Clark)

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — A grand jury declined for a second time in a week to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James on Thursday in another major blow to the Justice Department’s efforts to prosecute the president’s political opponents.

    The repeated failures amounted to a stunning rebuke of prosecutors’ bid to resurrect a criminal case President Donald Trump pressured them to bring, and hinted at a growing public leeriness of the administration’s retribution campaign.

    A grand jury rejection is an unusual circumstance in any case, but is especially stinging for a Justice Department that has been steadfast in its determination to seek revenge against Trump foes like James and former FBI Director James Comey. On separate occasions, citizens have heard the government’s evidence against James and have come away underwhelmed, unwilling to rubber-stamp what prosecutors have attempted to portray as a clear-cut criminal case.

    A judge threw out the original indictments against James and Comey in November, ruling that the prosecutor who presented to the grand jury, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

    The Justice Department asked a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, to return an indictment Thursday after a different grand jury in Norfolk last week refused to do so. The failure to secure an indictment was confirmed by two people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to publicly discuss the case and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

    It was not immediately clear Thursday whether prosecutors would try for a third time to seek a new indictment. One of the people familiar with the matter said prosecutors were still evaluating next steps and stood behind the charges.

    A lawyer for James, who has denied any wrongdoing, said the “unprecedented rejection makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day.”

    “This case already has been a stain on this Department’s reputation and raises troubling questions about its integrity,” defense attorney Abbe Lowell said in a statement. “Any further attempt to revive these discredited charges would be a mockery of our system of justice.”

    James, a Democrat who infuriated Trump after his first term with a lawsuit alleging that he built his business empire on lies about his wealth, was initially charged with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution in connection with a home purchase in 2020.

    During the sale, she signed a standard document called a “second home rider” in which she agreed to keep the property primarily for her “personal use and enjoyment for at least one year,” unless the lender agreed otherwise. Rather than using the home as a second residence, prosecutors say James rented it out to a family of three, allowing her to obtain favorable loan terms not available for investment properties.

    Both the James and Comey cases were brought shortly after the administration installed Halligan, a former Trump lawyer with no prior prosecutorial experience, as U.S. attorney amid public calls from the president to take action against his political opponents.

    But U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie threw out the cases last month over the unconventional mechanism that the Trump administration employed to appoint Halligan. The judge dismissed them without prejudice, allowing the Justice Department to try to file the charges again.

    Halligan had been named as a replacement for Erik Siebert, a veteran prosecutor in the office and interim U.S. attorney who resigned in September amid Trump administration pressure to file charges against both Comey and James. He stepped aside after Trump told reporters he wanted Siebert “out.”

    The White House is moving forward with the formal confirmation process for Halligan, and she recently returned her nominee questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which vets all U.S. attorney picks. But her nomination faces significant procedural obstacles.

    James’ lawyers separately argued the case was a vindictive prosecution brought to punish the Trump critic who spent years investigating and suing the Republican president and won a staggering judgment in a lawsuit alleging he defrauded banks by overstating the value of his real estate holdings on financial statements. The fine was later tossed out by a higher court, but both sides are appealing.

    Comey was separately charged with lying to Congress in 2020. Another federal judge has complicated the Justice Department’s efforts to seek a new indictment against Comey, temporarily barring prosecutors from accessing computer files belonging to Daniel Richman, a close Comey friend and Columbia University law professor whom prosecutors see as a central player in any potential case against the former FBI director.

    Prosecutors moved Tuesday to quash that order, calling Richman’s request for the return of his files a “strategic tool to obstruct the investigation and potential prosecution.” They said the judge had overstepped her bounds by ordering Richman’s property returned to him and said the ruling had impeded their ability to proceed with a case against Comey.

    _____

    Richer reported from Washington. Associated Press reporter Eric Tucker and Seung Min Kim in Washington contributed.

    Copyright
    © 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

    WTOP Staff

    Source link

  • Give Thanks for Incompetence Destroying Trump’s Second Term

    Photo: Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg/Getty Images

    A funny thing happened to Donald Trump in the past month. After spending much of the year on a sort of revanchist blitzkrieg that terrified the left and convinced many that his second term would far outpace his first, Trump has begun to genuinely fail. And the failure, for those who followed the last time closely, is familiar: Rising autocracy is headed off by rank incompetence.

    The collapse of the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James speak to the rot at the heart of the Trump administration. Lindsey Halligan, predictably, was found to be appointed illegally after her predecessor was driven out of office after rightly concluding that the cases did not have legal merit. The Senate never confirmed Halligan, and her interim appointment couldn’t be indefinite as a matter of law. In a fascist society, where the rule of law means nothing, it would not have mattered that the deeply underqualified Halligan was illegally appointed or that the cases were incredibly weak. The dictator decrees his political enemies must go to prison, and they are marched off. MAGA was plainly hoping, on some level, this was true now. Trump would get his glorious revenge for his own state and federal indictments, cowing all the Democrats who dared to resist him.

    But Comey and James are not going anywhere. Trump is free to pressure his sycophantic attorney general, Pam Bondi, to bring indictments against anyone he so chooses. He can prosecute through Truth Social posts. What he’s not entitled to, though, is actual legal victory. We do have judges in his country and we do have juries. If Halligan’s cases against Comey and James somehow reached the trial stage, it’s hard to fathom how she’d win. For all the talk, sometimes justified, of college-educated liberals living in their own bubbles, MAGA is plainly worse. What sophisticated political movement would try to attack its enemies this way? Compare the ham-fisted Halligan saga to how the late Dick Cheney ran roughshod over his opposition.

    Trump’s second term has been less internally chaotic than his first, with fewer resignations so far or leaks. Trump has retained one chief of staff, Susie Wiles, and one press secretary, Karoline Leavitt. The infighting that so characterized Trump’s early years in office is mostly absent. The administration seems united around the goals of punishing immigrants, imposing tariffs, and slashing the social safety net. Trump even wised up to the political damage Elon Musk was doing to his administration and drove him out. DOGE hollowed out the government, but Musk is no longer the face of this hollowing. Trump was able to get Musk to fade from view, which is no small feat.

    Old habits, though, die hard. Trump is thirsty for revenge, and he has thrown off the guardrails of the first term during which plenty of conventional Republicans still functioned within his orbit. John Kelly, his chief of staff from 2017 to ’19, and William Barr, his attorney general in ’19 and ’20, were two powerful members of his administration who openly defied him. Those days are gone. The Justice Department completely belongs to Trump. This is unsettling and has brought back all the predictions of American democracy’s imminent collapse. Trump is certainly behaving like a strongman, and the law to him is merely a suggestion. If there’s strength to be found in this approach — the Republican Party is fully MAGA controlled — the weaknesses are now being made plain.

    With no one, at all, to discipline Trump, half-baked cases against his political enemies are concocted. For years, his supporters and critics have treated him like a public-relations Svengali with every controversy distracting, successfully, from some other matter and his popularity remaining durable. Sometimes, though, a failure is a failure. Trump gains nothing by having his indictments blow up in his face. His margin for error is also much smaller than it was in the past. He’s a lame-duck, second-term president now. His approval rating has fallen close to 40 percent. Americans are angry that he hasn’t tamed inflation. Republican politicians themselves, while still unstintingly loyal, are starting to consider their futures. Trump will turn 80 next year. The odds of him violating the Constitution to seek a third term are remote and even if he did, it’s difficult to see how a four-time GOP nominee in his 80s with an underwater approval rating could defeat a standard Democrat who has triumphed in a primary. In the first term, Trump could always bounce back because there was the promise of tomorrow — another term, another campaign. That’s all gone now. Trump is in twilight.

    Ross Barkan

    Source link

  • Democratic attorneys general sue to block USDA guidance that makes some immigrants ineligible for SNAP benefits

    (CNN) — A coalition of 21 attorneys general have sued to block new guidance from the US Department of Agriculture that declares some immigrants, including refugees and those granted asylum, ineligible for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the coalition of other Democratic attorneys general, said in a statement Wednesday that the Trump administration is illegally cutting off benefits for tens of thousands of lawful permanent residents.

    The USDA provided the new guidance to states narrowing SNAP eligibility last month, aligning with rollbacks of the program outlined in President Donald Trump’s domestic policy law that passed earlier this year.

    The attorneys general argue in the lawsuit that the memo goes beyond what the law prescribes since it would make anyone who entered the country through humanitarian protection programs permanently ineligible for SNAP benefits — also known as food stamps — even if they become legal residents.

    The group of attorneys general warn that the USDA’s guidance, which prompts a swift overhaul of eligibility systems, “threatens to destabilize SNAP nationwide,” and could put significant financial strain on states that would have to shoulder the cost of fines.

    The lawsuit asks a federal judge in Oregon to vacate and block the implementation of the USDA’s guidance.

    The filing comes just days after a federal judge in Virginia dismissed an indictment against James, whom President Donald Trump has viewed as a political opponent.

    A spokesperson for USDA declined to comment on “pending litigation.”

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

    Alison Main and CNN

    Source link

  • 11/24: The Takeout with Major Garrett


    11/24: The Takeout with Major Garrett – CBS News









































    Watch CBS News



    Judge dismisses James Comey and Letitia James cases; President Trump holds call with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • 11/24: CBS Evening News



    Watch CBS News



    Judge tosses out cases against James Comey and Letitia James; Inside historic auction of Muppet memorabilia.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Judge tosses out cases against James Comey and Letitia James

    A federal judge dismissed the criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James on the grounds that Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. attorney who secured their indictments, was unlawfully appointed to the role. Scott MacFarlane has more.

    Source link

  • Why the cases against James Comey and Letitia James were dismissed

    The criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James were dismissed by a federal judge Monday on the grounds that Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. attorney who secured their indictments, was unlawfully appointed to the role. CBS News Jake Rosen and Katrina Kaufman have more.

    Source link

  • Details on Comey-James hearing to potentially dismiss cases

    Attorneys representing both James Comey and Letitia James appeared in court on Thursday to argue for the dismissal of their federal indictments on the grounds that the prosecutor who obtained them was appointed unlawfully. CBS News justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane has the details.

    Source link

  • Trump administration renews Supreme Court appeal to keep full SNAP payments frozen

    President Donald Trump’s administration returned to the Supreme Court on Monday in a push to keep full payments in the SNAP federal food aid program frozen while the government is shut down, even as some families struggled to put food on the table.

    The request is the latest in a flurry of legal activity over how the program that helps 42 million Americans buy groceries should proceed during the historic U.S. government shutdown. Lower courts have ruled that the government must keep full payments flowing, but the Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to keep them frozen for now.

    The high court is expected to rule Tuesday.

    The seesawing rulings so far have created a situation where beneficiaries in some states, including Hawaii and New Jersey, have received their full monthly allocations and those in others, such as Nebraska and West Virginia, have seen nothing.

    Brandi Johnson, 48, of St. Louis, said she’s struggling to make the $20 she has left in her SNAP account stretch. Johnson said she has been skipping meals the past two weeks to make sure her three teenage children have something to eat. She is also helping care for her infant granddaughter, who has food allergies, and her 80-year-old mother.

    She said food pantries have offered little help in recent days. Many require patrons to live in a certain ZIP code or are dedicated to helping the elderly first.

    “I think about it 24 hours a day, seven days a week, literally,” Johnson said. “Because you’ve got to figure out how you’re going to eat.”

    Millions receive aid while others wait

    The Trump administration argued that lower court orders requiring the full funding of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program wrongly affect ongoing negotiations in Congress about ending the shutdown. Supreme Court Solicitor General D. John Sauer called the funding lapse tragic, but said judges shouldn’t be deciding how to handle it.

    The Senate Monday passed a compromise funding package that would end the government shutdown and refill SNAP funds. It now goes to the House for consideration.

    Trump’s administration initially said SNAP benefits would not be available in November because of the shutdown. After some states and nonprofit groups sued, judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled the administration could not skip November’s benefits entirely.

    The administration then said it would use an emergency reserve fund to provide 65% of the maximum monthly benefit. On Thursday, Rhode Island-based U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell said that wasn’t good enough, and ordered full funding for SNAP benefits by Friday.

    Some states acted quickly to direct their EBT vendors to disburse full monthly benefits to SNAP recipients. Millions of people in at least a dozen states — all with Democratic governors — received the full amount to buy groceries before Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson put McConnell’s order on hold Friday night, pending further deliberation by an appeals court.

    Delays cause complications for some beneficiaries

    Millions more people still have not received SNAP payments for November, because their states were waiting on guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP. Several states have made partial payments, including Texas, where officials said money was going on cards for some beneficiaries Monday.

    “Continued delays deepen suffering for children, seniors, and working families, and force nonprofits to shoulder an even heavier burden,” Diane Yentel, President and CEO, National Council of Nonprofits, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said in a statement Monday. “If basic decency and humanity don’t compel the administration to assure food security for all Americans, then multiple federal court judges finding its actions unlawful must.”

    Trump’s administration has argued that the judicial order to provide full benefits violates the Constitution by infringing on the spending power of the legislative and executive branches.

    Wisconsin, which was among the first to load full benefits after McConnell’s order, had its federal reimbursement frozen. The state’s SNAP account could be depleted as soon as Monday, leaving no money to reimburse stores that sell food to SNAP recipients, according to a court filing.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James said Monday that some cardholders have been turned away by stores concerned that they won’t be reimbursed — something she called to stop.

    New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin said Trump was fighting “for the right to starve Americans.”

    “It’s the most heinous thing I’ve ever seen in public life,” he said.

    The latest rulings keep payments on hold, at least for now

    States administering SNAP payments continue to face uncertainty over whether they can — and should — provide full monthly benefits during the ongoing legal battles.

    The Trump administration over the weekend demanded that states “undo” full benefits that were paid during a one-day window after a federal judge ordered full funding and before a Supreme Court justice paused that order.

    A federal appeals court in Boston left the full benefits order in place late Sunday, though the Supreme Court order ensures the government won’t have to pay out for at least 48 hours.

    “The record here shows that the government sat on its hands for nearly a month, unprepared to make partial payments, while people who rely on SNAP received no benefits a week into November and counting,” Judge Julie Rikleman of the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals wrote.

    U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, presiding over a case filed in Boston by Democratic state officials, on Monday paused the USDA’s request from Saturday that states “immediately undo any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits.”

    In a hearing later that Monday, Talwani said that communication to states was confusing, especially because the threat came just a day after USDA sent letters to states saying SNAP would be paid in full.

    Federal government lawyer Tyler Becker said the order was only intended for states to receive the full amount of SNAP benefits, and “had nothing to do with beneficiaries.”

    Talwani said she would issue a full order soon.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin; Margery Beck in Omaha, Nebraska; John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas; Kimberlee Kruesi in Providence, Rhode Island; Nicholas Riccardi in Denver; and Stephen Groves and Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • 10/24: The Takeout with Major Garrett



    10/24: The Takeout with Major Garrett – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    New York Attorney General Letitia James pleads not guilty to bank fraud charges; Former Obama speechwriter finds common ground by riding the waves

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James set to plead not guilty to bank fraud charges in federal court

    Norfolk, Virginia — New York Attorney General Letitia James will be appearing in court Friday for her arraignment on federal charges of bank fraud in Norfolk, Virginia, after the Justice Department indicted her earlier this month.

    U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker, appointed to the federal bench by former President Joe Biden, is presiding over the case.

    The indictment alleges that James misrepresented how she would use a house she bought in Norfolk in 2020, in order to obtain a lower interest rate on her mortgage. Instead of using the property as a second home, the indictment says, she rented it to a family member, treating it as an investment property, in contravention of the mortgage terms. 

    According to the indictment, James purchased the home for $137,000 and borrowed $109,600 — and because she received more favorable lending terms and a larger seller credit, she allegedly saved $18,933 over the life of the loan.  

    James called the charges “baseless” in a video statement.

    “This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system,” she said.

    James’ attorney, Abbe Lowell, said James “flatly and forcefully denies these charges” and said he is “deeply concerned that this case is driven by President Trump’s desire for revenge.”

    In a pair of legal filings Thursday, James’ legal team took aim at the Trump-appointed prosecutor overseeing her bank fraud case, accusing interim U.S. attorney Lindsey Halligan of an improper conversation with a journalist and vowing to seek dismissal of the indictment on the grounds that Halligan was unlawfully named to the job.

    Days before James was indicted, a grand jury impaneled by the same federal prosecutor’s office handed up an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey, on charges of lying to Congress, with whom Mr. Trump clashed during his first term.

    Last month, Mr. Trump publicly urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey and James, as well as Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California, another vocal critic of his administration.

    The Justice Department launched a criminal probe into James in May regarding mortgage fraud. Three months later, it expanded its investigation into the Office of the New York Attorney General’s handling of the Trump Organization probe. 

    In February 2024, the state of New York won a civil fraud judgment against Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization for $354 million in fines for submitting what the judge said was “blatantly false financial data” to accountants in order to borrow more money at more favorable interest rates.

    The ruling also barred the Trump Organization from seeking loans from financial institutions in New York for three years and also banned Mr. Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation for three years. An appellate court erased the fine in August, but James is appealing the ruling. The court kept the other sanctions in place, however.

    Mr. Trump announced last month that he had selected Halligan, a former White House aide, to temporarily lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia after the abrupt ouster of the prosecutor he had originally named to the post, Erik Siebert.

    Sources told CBS News that Halligan presented evidence to the Comey and Letitia James grand juries alone, rather than with line prosecutors who had worked on the cases. Since Halligan became the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, several prosecutors have left the office or been fired.

    Two federal prosecutors in the office, Kristin Bird and Elizabeth Yusi, were terminated last week from their posts as assistant U.S. attorneys in the Norfolk office after they voiced opposition to the criminal case against James. The office’s top national security official, Michael Ben’Ary, was also terminated in recent weeks.

    As a result of the turnover, two North Carolina federal prosecutors have been brought in to handle the Comey case, and a federal prosecutor from Missouri will be presenting the James case. 

    Melissa Quinn

    contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • The John Bolton Indictment Is Different

    Photo: Jason Bergman/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    You ever get the sense Donald Trump and John Bolton might not like each other?

    Bolton, who served as National Security Advisor in the first Trump administration, has publicly called the President “a danger for the republic,” “stunningly uninformed,” and “unfit for office.” Trump, in turn, has branded Bolton “a sleazebag, actually,” “a very dumb person,” and the owner of a “stupid white moustache.” Upon publication of Bolton’s 2020 tell-all book, Trump responded, “I believe that he’s a criminal, and I believe, frankly, he should go to jail for that.”

    Trump might get his wish. While Bolton resides firmly on Trump’s enemies list, the indictment returned against him Thursday in federal district court in Maryland also bears substantial hallmarks of legitimacy. Trump surely takes retributive delight in Bolton’s prosecution, and has encouraged it in unsubtle ways. At the same time, the Bolton indictment appears to have genuine merit.

    Listen to The Counsel podcast

    Join a team of experts — from former prosecutors to legal scholars — as they break down the complex legal issues shaping our country today. Twice a week, Elie Honig and other CAFE Contributors examine the intersecting worlds of law, politics, and current events.

    The indictment charges Bolton with eighteen federal crimes: eight related to transmitting sensitive national defense information and ten more for improperly retaining the same. The information at issue contained deadly serious government secrets. Bolton allegedly disclosed to outsiders information about “future attack” plans by foreign adversary groups; details of impending missile launches by foreign adversaries; information about sensitive intelligence sources; and assessments about leaders of foreign countries. Apparently, Bolton would type up notes based on information he learned as National Security Advisor. He’d then use his personal AOL account (which was eventually hacked by Iran) to email “diary-like entries” to two people – both relatives of his – who had no security clearances. Bolton also allegedly kept highly sensitive documents in his private home.

    There’s no doubt that Bolton, a onetime U.S. ambassador and National Security Advisor, was well aware of the rules governing handling of classified information. As the indictment notes, he said publicly in 2017, “If you’re conscious of the need to protect classified information you’ll remember what the rules are. If I had done at the State Department what Hillary Clinton did, I’d be wearing an orange jumpsuit now.” More recently, in 2025, Bolton railed against various public officials who committed the “original sin” (as Bolton then phrased it) of communicating about sensitive national security matters over the Signal app. The legal takeaway: A defense of ignorance or lack of intent won’t fly.

    Bolton, through his attorney, categorically denies wrongdoing.

    While we now have a clear sense of the prosecution’s theory of criminality, we don’t yet have a definitive read on the strength of the proof, or on Bolton’s defense. That’ll come in time, as the Justice Department turns over discovery to the defense, as the parties file motions in court, and eventually when the case goes to trial.

    But for now, we can look at a series of reliable collateral indicators that suggest this prosecution is legitimate. Consider, first, that the Justice Department’s instant investigation of Bolton reportedly escalated during the Biden administration. Trump surely was delighted to find it waiting for him when he took office, but – unlike the cases against James Comey and Letitia James – this one wasn’t originated by the President and his band of gleeful political enforcers.

    It also appears that the Bolton matter arose organically, and not because some official decided to root around for dirt buried in the mortgage files of a disfavored subject. According to public reporting and court documents filed in connection with search warrants conducted at Bolton’s home and office in August, the criminal inquiry began when U.S. intelligence officials learned that Bolton’s AOL email account had been hacked by a foreign government. The New York Times reported that those emails contained “sensitive information that Mr. Bolton, while still working in the first Trump administration, appeared to have sent to people close to him on an unclassified system.” (The indictment confirms this). The case arose, then, in the ordinary course of intelligence and law enforcement business, and not as a targeted inquiry aimed at Bolton.

    We also know that career, nonpolitical DOJ prosecutors at one point sought more time to review the evidence against Bolton, and now are on board with a prosecution. Again, note the contrast to the Comey and James indictments, which prompted a string of resignations by (and terminations of) dissenting prosecutorial professionals who saw no good faith basis to indict.

    Prosecutors are hardly alone in concluding that substantial evidence exists to establish that Bolton committed a crime. Before the Justice Department executed search warrants at Bolton’s Maryland home and Washington, D.C. office in August, prosecutors had to obtain authorization from two federal judges (one in each jurisdiction). We know, as a matter of law, that those judges concluded that prosecutors established at least probable cause that a crime had been committed and that the searches would likely uncover evidence of that crime. And we know that a grand jury heard the evidence and found probable cause to issue the indictment.

    The probable cause standard is, of course, lower than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” burden that prosecutors must ultimately satisfy at trial. But it’s not nothing, either. I can attest from experience that, while grand juries can be pushovers, judges do scrutinize search warrant applications fairly closely – particularly if the target is a high-profile former public official.

    Nor can Bolton claim differential treatment, given other semi-recent cases involving potential mishandling of classified information. After Hillary Clinton used a private email server as Secretary of State, she became the subject of a prolonged criminal investigation that culminated with a 2016 election-eve public announcement by the FBI director – the aforementioned Comey, as history remembers  – that she had been “extremely careless” but would not be indicted. When the public learned that Joe Biden kept classified documents at his private home and office, the Justice Department (under Biden himself) appointed a special counsel, Robert Hur, who investigated for over a year and concluded in early 2024 Biden had “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials” but, on balance, should not be charged. And when Trump took classified documents to Mar-A-Lago, he got indicted by DOJ special counsel Jack Smith. That case could’ve landed Trump in prison, had he not won the 2024 election. Bolton’s conduct, if proved, is more serious than all of those recent examples – especially given his systematic and intentional dissemination of the government’s most sensitive secrets to two outsiders.

    There’s no question Trump despises Bolton (and vice versa). And Trump plainly has been giddy at the prospect of Bolton’s indictment. But the Bolton case appears to differ in kind from the recent prosecutions of Comey and James. This one relates to far more serious conduct, and it arose under less dubious circumstances. Ultimately this is a problem Trump has created with his payback spree: It’s increasingly hard to tell the bogus cases against his political antagonists from the valid ones.

    Elie Honig

    Source link

  • Claim misleads about ‘mortgage fraud’ on Trump’s Cabinet

    As the Trump administration weighs mortgage fraud charges against Democrats, Trump’s critics accused the administration of enforcing a double standard.

    Trump has frequently described his desire for revenge on past antagonists. On Oct. 9, federal prosecutors in Virginia secured a grand jury indictment against New York Attorney General Letitia James on charges related to mortgage fraud. James prosecuted Donald Trump in a civil case in New York between his two presidential terms. She has maintained her innocence.

    Dan Koh, a onetime aide to former President Joe Biden who now hosts “The People’s Cabinet” podcast, criticized Trump and his administration during an Oct. 9 appearance on CNN’s “Newsnight with Abby Phillip,” hours after James’ indictment became public. (On Oct. 16, Koh announced he was running for the U.S. House in Massachusetts’ 6th district.)

    During the show’s roundtable, Koh said prosecutors are “accusing Letitia James of this mortgage fraud. There are three Cabinet members who committed mortgage fraud that he’s just letting fly.”

    Koh told PolitiFact he was referencing a Sept. 4 article by the investigative news organization ProPublica. The article said three Cabinet members — Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin — had each declared more than one home as their principal residence.

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    We found no news reports or statements from government officials about any of the three Cabinet members being targeted for prosecution for mortgage-related actions. 

    Legal experts have criticized James’ prosecution as questionable, given that scenarios like hers — involving modest amounts of money and given the difficulty of proving intent to defraud — are rarely prosecuted.

    However, Koh overstepped when he said the three Cabinet members had “committed mortgage fraud.” 

    The original documents ProPublica published show the mortgage agreements required the Cabinet members to make the homes their principal residences for a year. There’s no information showing they failed to do that. None has been charged, much less convicted, of mortgage fraud. (James hasn’t been convicted either.)

    What is James charged with?

    James is one of three Democratic figures — along with Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. — who have faced administration challenges over alleged mortgage fraud. Cook and Schiff deny the allegations as well.

    Each stands accused of attesting on legal documents that they were seeking mortgages for houses that qualified for more favorable interest rates than they otherwise would have received. Declaring that a home is a principal residence, for instance, typically allows the borrower to secure a lower interest rate than if it’s a secondary residence. A secondary residence can secure a lower rate than an investment property does.

    James’ indictment charges her with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution in connection with paperwork she filed for a house she purchased in Norfolk, Virginia. 

    According to the indictment, she signed a form that said she had to use the house as a second residence. Instead, the indictment said, James rented the house to a family of three. 

    James has maintained her innocence. News accounts and a letter from James’ attorney, written in April as the government was considering whether to file charges, stated that the renters were family members, and that in most years she did not charge them rent. The lawyer’s letter also said the government “cherry picked” paperwork and ignored other documents that accurately described her role. 

    Legal experts also say the bar for proving intent to deceive is high in cases like this, and the amount of money at stake would not normally lead to a prosecution. The indictment says James stood to save “approximately $17,837,” which would work out to $50 a month over the life of the 30-year loan, NBC News reported. If convicted, James could face up to 30 years in prison per count; up to a $1 million fine on each count; and forfeiture of the house. 

    What are the three Cabinet members accused of doing?

    ProPublica obtained the signed mortgage forms for six houses belonging to the three Cabinet members. The outlet said it had located the documents “while examining financial disclosure forms, county real estate records and publicly available mortgage data provided by Hunterbrook Media.” 

    Each of the three Cabinet members’ scenarios is slightly different. But in each case, the Cabinet member and a spouse signed paperwork for one house they described as their principal residence, then later signed paperwork for another house that they also described as their principal residence.

    According to ProPublica, the three Cabinet member examples were as follows:

    • DeRemer and her husband signed forms for principal-residence mortgages in both Arizona (2017) and Oregon (2021).

    • Duffy and his wife signed forms for principal-residence mortgages in both New Jersey (2021) and Washington, D.C. (2025).

    • Zeldin and his wife signed principal-residence mortgages in New York (2007) and Washington, D.C. (2024).

    ProPublica contacted each department that the Cabinet members represent, and each one, as well as the White House, denied any wrongdoing on behalf of the Cabinet members. 

    The terms of three Cabinet members’ agreements show no breaches

    Based on our review and discussions with experts, signing two forms citing a different house as one’s “principal residence” doesn’t, on its own, amount to a breach of the agreements’ terms.

    That’s because all six forms included an “occupancy” section saying the borrowers agreed to use the house as their “principal residence” within 60 days and for at least one year after the date of occupancy, “unless extenuating circumstances exist which are beyond” the borrower’s control. 

    “The occupancy covenant is only for one year,” said Adam Levitin, a Georgetown University law professor. 

    The three Cabinet members each signed a subsequent mortgage more than a year after signing the first one.

    “If the later mortgage is for a property that is actually the borrower’s principal residence for the year after that mortgage, there’s no problem, and nothing needs to be amended with the first property’s mortgage,” Levitin said.

    There’s also some wiggle room on having two principal residences simultaneously, Levitin said. “There are certainly circumstances in which a borrower might think of himself as having two or more principal residences, such as Mar-a-Lago and the White House” for Trump.

    Assessing Koh’s characterization

    Koh is wrong to say that any of the Cabinet members “committed mortgage fraud.” Not only have the Cabinet members not been charged with or convicted of any crimes, but also a plain reading of the mortgage documents would argue that signing two agreements listing different principal residences would not violate the agreements, because of the one-year clause.

    Koh told PolitiFact that his comment’s focus was on the latter point, about the contrast in how these cases were being treated.

    “To be clear, I think all of these accusations are a stretch at best, but I’m highlighting the hypocrisy and the administration’s failure to apply the same standard to all cases,” Koh said.

    Despite his inaccurate wording, Levitin said it’s “reasonable” for Koh to point out that James and other Democrats are drawing more intense scrutiny than the three Cabinet members are for common — and rarely prosecuted — mortgage actions.

    Our ruling

    Koh said that as the Trump administration pursues mortgage fraud charges against Letitia James, “there are three Cabinet members who committed mortgage fraud that he’s just letting fly.”

    Experts say mortgage fraud cases like the one against James are rarely prosecuted. But Koh’s description of the three Cabinet members’ situations is misleading.

    ProPublica published documents that show that three Trump Cabinet members signed mortgage paperwork classifying separate residences as their principal residences. But the documents also show the mortgages required them to make the homes their principal residences for a year. There’s no information showing they failed to do that. None of the Cabinet members have been charged with or convicted of mortgage fraud.

    The statement contains an element of truth but leaves out facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.

    Source link

  • Watchdog group seeks probe of Comey, Letitia James cases

    Former federal ethics officials who served in Republican and Democratic administrations are asking the Justice Department’s inspector general to investigate the prosecutions of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

    In a letter obtained by CBS News, ethics officials who worked in the Obama and George W. Bush administrations urged a formal review of interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan’s decision to prosecute Comey and James.    

    They sent their request Tuesday to Acting Justice Department Inspector General William Blier, writing, “Ms. Halligan pursued these indictments to fulfill President Donald J. Trump’s longstanding personal vendetta against Mr. Comey and Ms. James, we are facing a turning point in our democracy and some of the most egregious examples of vindictive and meritless prosecution that our nation has ever seen.”

    The letter was written by leaders of the Democracy Defenders Fund, a Washington-based nonpartisan group that has frequently been critical of the Trump administration.

    The group is led by Norm Eisen, former ethics official for President Barack Obama; Richard Painter, a former associate counsel to President George W. Bush; and Virginia Canter, a former White House associate counsel to Presidents Bill Clinton and Obama.

    Their letter also said, “A president should never order prosecutions of his enemies. That happens in Putin’s Russia, and it has happened in other dictatorships, but not here–until now.” 

    Comey and Mr. Trump have had a contentious relationship for years. Comey, who was FBI director when Mr. Trump took office in 2017, was fired later that year by the president. Initially, the White House indicated he had been ousted over his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server, but the president later told NBC News’ Lester Holt that he had the FBI’s Russia investigation on his mind and had terminated Comey because of “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia.” 

    That firing ultimately set into motion special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Kremlin. Mr. Trump has repeatedly denounced those allegations as a “hoax.” Mueller’s probe found that Russia interfered in the election and several Trump campaign officials had contacts with Russians, but did not establish that campaign staff illegally conspired with the Russian government.

    For his part, Comey has been a vocal critic of Mr. Trump since his firing, calling him “morally unfit” to be president in a 2018 interview.

    The Democracy Defenders Fund also contended that “prosecutors should never be fired for refusing to bring charges they conclude are unfounded, even if the president orders them to do so. Yet that appears to be just what President Trump has done in order to charge Mr. Comey and Ms. James.”

    The criminal cases were filed against Comey and James less than three weeks after President Trump called for their prosecution in a post on social media. 

    The acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who had been appointed to the position by Mr. Trump, resigned after he did not bring prosecutions of Comey and James, and the president announced he had been fired. A Trump White House aide, Lindsey Halligan, was then installed as acting U.S. attorney and within days secured grand jury indictments against Comey and James — with prosecutors charging Comey less than a week before the statute of limitations ran out.  

    Halligan has defended both of the prosecutions. In the hours after James’s indictment last week, Halligan said in a statement, “No one is above the law. The charges as alleged in this case represent intentional, criminal acts and tremendous breaches of the public’s trust.”  

    After charging Comey, Halligan said, “The charges as alleged in this case represent a breach of the public trust at an extraordinary level,”

    Comey is charged with making a false statement and obstruction of Congress, for allegedly lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 when he denied that he had authorized someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports. Comey has denied any wrongdoing. 

    During an arraignment proceeding last week, Comey’s defense attorney told a judge that Comey would seek a dismissal of the case next week, arguing the case is an unlawful vindictive prosecution against one of the president’s critics.

    The Democracy Defenders Fund’s request for a federal review of Halligan’s cases also argued, “The same pattern has now been repeated a second time in as many weeks with respect to another victim of President Trump’s wrath. Ms. Halligan’s prosecution of Letitia James on two counts of ‘bank fraud’ and a ‘false statement’ appears to be a further attempt to fulfill President Trump’s personal vendetta against his political enemies.”

    “Trump’s animus against Ms. James stems from having successfully brought a years-long civil fraud case against the Trump Organization, which included judgments against President Trump and two of his sons and imposed a court monitor with limits on their ability to conduct business in New York,” the fund’s letter continued.

    James is scheduled to appear in court on Oct. 24, to answer to charges of mortgage fraud and false statement in connection with a Norfolk, Virginia, home in 2020. James has also denied wrongdoing.

    The Office of the Justice Department Inspector General is on furlough because of the shutdown and did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Justice Department declined to comment.

    Source link

  • New York AG Letitia James gets standing ovation at Mamdani rally in 1st appearance since federal indictment

    Letitia James, New York’s indicted attorney general, spoke at a campaign rally for mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani in her first public appearance since the Justice Department charged her with bank fraud. 

    James, a longtime foe of President Trump, received a standing ovation from thousands of supporters attending the Democratic nominee’s event Monday night at the United Palace Theater in Manhattan’s Washington Heights neighborhood. 

    James did not mention Mr. Trump by name, but remained defiant in her remarks. 

    “I will not bow, I will not break, I will not bend, I will not capitulate. I will not give in. I will not give up,” James said. “You come for me, you gotta come through all of us.” 

    New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks during an event for New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, Monday, Oct. 13, 2025, in New York.

    Olga Fedorova / AP


    James was indicted on one count of bank fraud and another count of making a false statement, stemming from a house she bought in Virginia. She dismissed the charges as “baseless” shortly after they were announced last week. 

    At the rally, James wasted no time appearing to take aim at the president. 

    “I won’t give up and I won’t give in. So we have no time to linger and focus on pettiness and revenge. We’ve gotta press on, press forward, continue the journey, claim the victory … and so I fear no man,” she said.

    Mamdani, the Queens assemblyman who won the Democratic primary, has been a champion of James since the beginning. 

    “For years, you have fought the good fight for New Yorkers, and now it’s our chance to fight for you,” Mamdani said. 

    Letitia James Mamdani

    New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks during his election campaign event, Monday, Oct. 13, 2025, in New York.

    Olga Fedorova / AP


    Mamdani maintains a double-digit lead in polling over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa, who did not appear on the campaign trail Monday. But all three candidates did release statements Monday praising the Israel-Hamas peace plan and release of hostages. 

    A spokesperson for James said her campaign for reelection next year has raised about $1 million since her indictment, mostly from new donors.

    James is scheduled to make her first appearance in a Virginia federal court on Oct. 24. 

    Source link

  • Zohran Mamdani reveals what Letitia James told him after getting indicted

    Zohran Mamdani, Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, shared what New York Attorney General Letitia James told him after she was indicted on Thursday.

    Why It Matters

    The federal indictment of James has thrust the topic of prosecutorial independence into the national spotlight and reignited debate over concerns of possible politicization of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). James, who earned national attention for her successful civil fraud case against President Donald Trump in 2023, now finds herself facing allegations of bank fraud and making false statements, brought by a newly appointed Trump prosecutor.

    Lawmakers and legal experts say the case highlights growing concerns about the use of federal power for perceived political retribution amid a broader erosion of longstanding judicial norms. Some Republicans, meanwhile, argue the case brings long overdue accountability to a high-ranking official. The high-profile indictment comes as both major parties accuse each other of weaponizing the justice system, compounding doubts surrounding its integrity among Americans.

    What To Know

    While speaking with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Friday, Mamdani was asked about his conversation with the state’s attorney general. Mamdani said, “She told me, ‘Don’t worry about me.’ And I think that’s just indicative of what she means to so many New Yorkers.”

    “She is somebody who has put the city, the state, the people of it first, and frankly that’s why Donald Trump is persecuting her. It’s because of the fact that she looks at everyone in the state, everyone in this country as being held to the same standards of the law. And she held Donald Trump to that same law,” Mamdani continued.

    “And he couldn’t take the audacity, that he would have that applied to him,” Mamdani added. “And so, what we’re seeing is the weaponization of justice and it’s one that’s looking to make an example of the attorney general, but it’s one where we will have her back through every step of the way.”

    On Thursday, Lindsey Halligan, recently appointed by Trump as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, secured a federal grand jury indictment against James. The indictment alleges that James misrepresented the use of a Virginia property on a 2020 mortgage application, claiming it was a secondary residence to obtain more favorable terms, when it was allegedly used as a rental.

    Newsweek reached out to the press office for the Eastern District of Virginia via email Friday night for comment.

    What People Are Saying

    Mamdani, on X Thursday: “New Yorkers know Attorney General James for who she is: a champion for justice who fights relentlessly for the people. Donald Trump knows her only as an obstacle to his corruption. No one should be surprised that Donald Trump is employing fascist tactics—prosecuting his opponents, weaponizing the federal government, and attacking the very fabric of our democracy. And Trump should not be surprised when millions of Americans stand up to his authoritarianism and his greed. If Trump wants to leverage baseless charges to visit political retribution on New York’s Attorney General, he’ll have to go through New Yorkers first. Tish James has had our back, time and again. We have hers.”

    Abbe Lowell, attorney for James, in a statement Thursday: “We are deeply concerned that this case is driven by President Trump’s desire for revenge,” adding, “When a President can publicly direct charges to be filed against someone—when it was reported that career attorneys concluded none were warranted—it marks a serious attack on the rule of law. We will fight these charges in every process allowed in the law.”

    Scott Jennings, former adviser to President George W. Bush, on X Thursday: “Allow me to quote Letitia James directly: ‘When powerful people cheat to get better loans, it comes at the expense of hard-working people.’ There was no outrage from Dems about Tish’s political prosecution of Trump — but now that the shoe is on the other foot, it’s a crisis.”

    What Happens Next

    James is set to appear for arraignment in Virginia on October 24.

    If convicted of bank fraud or making false statements, the penalties could include up to 30 years in prison and $1 million in fines for each count, the DOJ says.

    Source link

  • Letitia James, the New York attorney general who defeated Trump in court, indicted by Justice Department

    (CNN) — New York Attorney General Letitia James was indicted Thursday in Alexandria, Virginia, as President Donald Trump’s Justice Department continues to pursue charges against his political opponents.

    James has been under investigation since May over a 2023 mortgage she took out to buy a home in Norfolk, Virginia. Thursday’s indictment focused on a 2020 mortgage for a different property in Norfolk.

    The grand jury returned two felony charges: bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution. James’ first court appearance is scheduled for October 24 in Norfolk.

    According to the indictment, James claimed on mortgage paperwork that a home she purchased in Norfolk would be her second residence. That claim allowed her to get favorable loan terms not available for investment properties, prosecutors say.

    But, prosecutors allege, James did not use the house and instead rented the property to a family of three. They allege she falsely stated in loan applications that the residence would be a secondary home when they allege James knew she would use it as an investment property.

    According to the indictment, James received a lower mortgage rate on the property as a secondary mortgage than she would have had it been treated as an investment property. Prosecutors allege James received improper gains of $18,933 over the life of the loan.

    The charges come as Trump continues to call for his enemies to be prosecuted in court. Former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty Wednesday to allegedly making a false statement in a congressional proceeding. The Justice Department has also opened investigation into former Trump national security adviser John Bolton, California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff, and others.

    “This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system,” James said in a statement.

    “These charges are baseless, and the president’s own public statements make clear that his only goal is political retribution at any cost,” she added. “The president’s actions are a grave violation of our Constitutional order and have drawn sharp criticism from members of both parties.”

    James’ relationship with Trump has been adversarial for years as James campaigned on promises to investigate Trump and ultimately won a civil fraud case against Trump, his adult sons and his real estate business. A judge found them liable for fraud for inflating the value of their properties, and ordered Trump to pay $355 million in penalties.

    Attorney General Letitia James sits in the courtroom during the civil fraud trial of former U.S. President Donald Trump at New York Supreme Court in January 2024 in New York City. Credit: Seth Wenig/Pool / Getty Images/File via CNN Newsource

    A New York appeals court tossed the penalties and Trump has appealed the verdict.

    During the 11-week trial, Trump’s anger toward James was palpable. He railed against her in the courthouse hallways and from the witness stand. Trump testified as James sat across from him in the courtroom galley.

    “This is a political witch hunt and I think she should be ashamed of herself,” Trump testified. “You believe this political hack back there and that’s unfortunate.”

    James often punched back outside of the courtroom, on social media or in video statements.

    Last month CNN reported that Justice Department prosecutors in Virginia, led at the time by Erik Siebert, interviewed dozens of witnesses and did not believe they gathered enough evidence to support criminal charges against James.

    Under pressure by Trump to bring charges against Comey and James, Siebert resigned and was replaced as US attorney by Trump’s former personal attorney Lindsey Halligan.

    “No one is above the law. The charges as alleged in this case represent intentional, criminal acts and tremendous breaches of the public’s trust,” Halligan said in a statement. “The facts and the law in this case are clear, and we will continue following them to ensure that justice is served.”

    Ed Martin, Trump’s Justice Department weaponization chief, posted on social media after the charges were announced: “Promises made, Promises kept.”

    Martin previously posed for photos outside of James’ Brooklyn home in August and called on her to resign in a letter to her attorney.

    Mortgage fraud investigation

    The investigation had focused on a mortgage obtained in 2023 for a property in Norfolk.

    Her attorneys provided a document to the Justice Department in April to push back on what they called “threadbare” allegations.

    They said that one document in the mortgage application “mistakenly” said the property would be James’ primary residence. But they submitted other documents to argue there was no fraud.

    In one document, James writes in an email to her loan originator, “this property WILL NOT be my primary residence.”

    That property in question, however, was unrelated to the underlying charges in the indictment, according to a source familiar.

    CNN’s Casey Gannon and Devan Cole contributed to this report.

    This story has been updated with additional reporting.

    Kristen Holmes, Hannah Rabinowitz, Kara Scannell and CNN

    Source link