“No matter how big, rich or powerful you are, no one is beyond the law.”
Those words by New York Attorney General Leticia James echo Throughout the media, her office secured judgement against Donald Trump about false business practices, including misrepresentation of loan documents.
They may reverberate even more this week as James finds himself the subject of a criminal referral for alleged financial fraud in order to secure his property loan.
On April 14, William J. Plute, director of the United States Federal Housing (FHFA), sent a referral letter to the Department of Justice detailing the false statements James had filed to secure a mortgage.
The details of the referral are particularly awful for the Attorney General, who has indicted Trump for everything but tearing the label off the mattress.
Certainly, the biggest risk is that the Letitia James Standard can be applied to Letitia James to ensure that “no one exceeds the law.”
The allegations against James go from lying to something really strange.
In securing loans for her home in Norfolk, Virginia, James has been accused of claiming through her representative that the property would become her main residence.
As the introduction points out, primary homes receive a more advantageous rate.
However, as “New York State Attorney General.” [James] The law requires her to have her primary residence in New York. ”
Especially at the Department of Justice He was indicted Those who committed this common scam.
For example, in 2017, he requested a Puerto Rican man to make a false statement about a reverse mortgage loan application that falsely claimed his property as a primary residence.
“Mortgage lenders provide capital to allow people to buy homes rather than illegally enrich themselves,” he emphasized.
There are other such cases under USC 1014 and related laws.
James could argue that these expressions were made by third parties acting on her behalf.
But that’s exactly the argument that she repeatedly refused in Trump’s case, claiming that he is legally obligated to consider all applications for his name or his company.
James has also been accused of misrepresenting the five-unit Brooklyn property as four-unit property in order to receive better interest rates… and to receive mortgage assistance. [the Home Affordable Modification Program]. ”
The introduction also includes claims that James submitted a paper listing herself and her father as a married couple.
The referral says last year Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby was convicted by the Biden administration for filing a false mortgage application.
Another case last week led to a guilty plea for filing misconduct on a mortgage.
James’ timing didn’t get any worse.
The Trump civil lawsuit has been suffering from appeal for months on long-deferred opinions.
The argument for the appeal didn’t work for James if he caused a grotesque $5 billion fine if no one lost a dime.
James accused Trump of increasing the property value of the filing. This is a common practice in the real estate sector.
It didn’t matter that the company warned the bank to do its own assessment.
It had nothing to do with the bank officials who testified that they made money from the transactions. Certainly, “victims” wanted more business from Trump.
That’s not important.
Not only did James demand a further fine, but he wanted to seize Trump’s property after Trump was told to secure it. Absurd $455 million bond To simply ensure an appeal review.
In that case, James repeated her mantra, saying that there would be no exception for those who are rich and powerful.
She argued that the accuracy of such financial records is essential and must be strictly enforced.
Many of us opposed James’s selective targeting Trump after he took the pledge to nail him with an unspecified crime.
James argued that this is not a law and would prosecute anyone who committed a false or misleading statement regarding a financial application. She is that person now.
It is not clear what James’ defense will be about these allegations.
But she may cite a recent Supreme Court decision in Thompson v. the United States that in March USC §1014 ruled that it did not criminalize a misleading but misleading but unfair statement.
The problem is that if proven, these statements are not misleading.
They are false.
This was James’ main residence or not.
This was or not a 4-unit property.
The allegations are that these statements matched the terms of the loan that gave James a financial advantage.
James has one advantage.
She is unlikely to be charged by New York prosecutors using ridiculous weaponized laws against Trump.
She emphasized that Trump doesn’t have to generate a penny loss to hit the victim with a $5 billion fine.
But it’s Trump, this is New York.
There are no mob or media frenzy requests.
Certainly James does not explain how such prosecution is essential.
Jonathan Turley is Shapiro, a professor of public interest law at George Washington University, and said, “Essential rights: Free speech in an age of anger.”
