It looks like the party is over for Tish James – wikimedia commons image
On Tuesday night, the Trump Administration criminally referred New York State Attorney General Letitia James to the Department of Justice over accusations of mortgage fraud.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) accused Letitia James of falsifying records, citing a 5-unit property in New York she claimed was only four units in order to get a more favorable loan.
FHFA Director William Pulte said in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi that James appears to have falsified records to meet certain lending requirements and receive favorable loan terms.
Here is a copy of Pulte’s criminal referral letter of Letisha James to AG Pam Bondi.
page 1
page 2
page 3
This news on Tuesday night is not a surprise to The Gateway Pundit readers.
The Gateway Pundit was the first to bring you information and evidence of Letitia James’s corrupt actions in obtaining several properties she purchased over the years.
And there is A LOT MORE to this story.
THANK YOU to Joel Gilbert for his work on this important investigation. Joe and his team are the real heroes here for exposing one of the most toxic politicians in America today.
On March 18, 2025 — The Gateway Pundit first reported on Letitia James and her Brooklyn apartment.
Big Development: Is Letitia James Guilty of Mortgage Fraud?
For over two decades, Letitia James repeatedly claimed her Brooklyn apartment building was a four-unit property on mortgage applications—despite official records proving it had five.
This may seem a minor discrepancy, but misrepresenting the unit count enabled her to secure more favorable loans, including a 2011 Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) loan that saved her tens of thousands of dollars annually.
Now, the same legal principles she used to prosecute others may be turning against her.
It all began in 2001 when Letitia James purchased a four-story multi-family apartment building with five apartments in Brooklyn for $550,000.
In 2005, James refinanced the building with an adjustable loan from Aegis that started at an interest rate of 7.2% with a ceiling of 10.2%.
For the next two decades, James took out refinancing mortgages and always listed the number of units as four.
Source: Office of the City Register
However, the official record in the most recent Certificate of Occupancy, dated January 26, 2001, says the property is legally classified as a five-family dwelling. In the world of mortgage lending, this is a critical distinction.
(Please note: The New York City Department of Buildings mandates that any alteration affecting the use, egress, or occupancy of a building necessitates an updated C of O.)
Source: NYC Department of Buildings
Properties with four or fewer units qualify for more favorable “residential” interest rates, while those with five or more are classified as “commercial” properties—often subject to higher rates.
Fast-forward to 2011. With her 2005 adjustable-rate mortgage likely escalating toward 10.2%, James sought relief from HAMP – a federal initiative under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) designed to assist homeowners at risk of foreclosure.
HAMP, however, had strict eligibility requirements. According to its official Making Home Affordable Program Handbook, “Eligibility is limited to owner-occupied properties with no more than four units.”
The reasoning was clear: the program aimed to assist regular homeowners and not landlords of multi-family rental apartment businesses.
In her HAMP application, James listed her property type as: DWELLING ONLY – 4 FAMILY (apartments).
However, as confirmed by the 2001 Certificate of Occupancy, the building was officially designated as a five-family apartment dwelling – making it ineligible for the HAMP program.
March 20, 2025 – Letitia James signs mortgage loans as her father’s spouse!
Mortgage Fraud Alert: Did Letitia James Marry Her Father?
Guest post by Joel Gilbert, with minor editorial adjustments for clarity and formatting.
My recent revelations in The Gateway Pundit demonstrated that New York Attorney General Letitia James obtained a federal government HAMP loan in 2011 to refinance her apartment building based on false unit information and a highly questionable hardship claim.
In her loan documents, James claimed her multi-family apartment building at Lafayette Avenue in Brooklyn had only four units, even though the official Certificate of Occupancy indicates five apartments.
This may seem a minor point, but James’s false claim helped her obtain a 2.7% government-backed HAMP loan unavailable to landlords with more than four apartments in a given building. James also claimed financial hardship to qualify for the loan, despite an income of over $126,390 in 2011.
Read more here:
Big Development: Is Letitia James Guilty of Mortgage Fraud?
There seems to be a pattern of possible mortgage fraud in regard to Letitia James. New questions have now arisen about a home Letitia James purchased with her father, Robert James.
In the Spring of 1983, Letitia James was 24 and living in Brooklyn with her parents. She had graduated from CUNY’s Lehman College in 1981. She would not begin law school at Howard University in Washington, DC, until the fall of 1984.
According to New York City Department of Finance records, on May 20, 1983, Letitia James and her father, Robert James, took out a real estate loan from Kadilac Funding Ltd. for $30,300 as “husband and wife.” For the record, Letitia James’ mother is Nellie James.
Source: New York City Department of Finance
Source: New York City Department of Finance
The husband-and-wife designation is clear and in capital letters on the very top of the first page of the loan document and on the signature page, which reads “ROBERT JAMES AND LETITIA JAMES, HIS WIFE.”
This loan was used to purchase a small 888-square-foot two-story home at 114-04 Inwood Street in Queens, New York, likely for Letitia to live in.
114-04 Inwood Street in Queens, New York
Meanwhile, the deed for the property, executed on the same day, has a different designation. On the top, it says the property is being purchased by “ROBERT JAMES AND LETITIA JAMES, his daughter.”
Source: New York City Department of Finance
At the age of 24, Letitia James may have had trouble qualifying for a home loan as a single woman with little or no income.
The question for Ms. James is whether she and her father defrauded the mortgage company, Kadilac Funding, by pretending to be husband and wife in order to qualify for the loan.
The less likely alternative is that Letitia actually married her father. In this case, she would have been telling the truth both on the mortgage and on the deed—father/ daughter/ father/ daughter—shades of Chinatown, but the marriage would have been fraudulent. What is true is that Letitia has not married anyone else in the years since.
March 25, 2025 – Letitia’s corruption may be widespread
The Letitia Files: Did Letitia James Illegally Hire a Nonprofit for Her 2013 Campaign?
Guest post by Joel Gilbert
New York Attorney General Letitia James’ multi-family apartment building in Brooklyn has begun to resemble a crime scene. Last week, I revealed two major incidences of potential mortgage fraud by James.
I detailed Letitia’s misrepresentations in her government HAMP Loan application whereby she falsified the number of apartment units in her building to obtain a loan at 2.7% on the back of the American taxpayer.
I also revealed that James once obtained a home loan by claiming she had married her father. By borrowing with her father, Robert James, as “husband and wife,” she was able to secure a home loan when she was 24 years old.
Now the spotlight is shining on what could be considered illegal campaign activity by Letitia James in 2013 when she ran for New York City Public Advocate.
The New York City Campaign Finance Board is an independent, nonpartisan agency that oversees the city’s campaign finance system.
Its main responsibilities include ensuring candidates comply with NYC’s campaign finance laws, including contribution limits, spending restrictions, and financial disclosure requirements.
Searching their records for Letitia James, it indicates her campaign hired New York Communities for Change (NYCC), a non-profit 501(c)(4) organization, to engage in political campaign activity on her behalf in September, October, and November of 2013.
Screenshot: NYCC
The campaign activities listed by James indicate that her campaign paid NYCC for “Campaign Workers,” “Canvassing,” “Staffing,” and “Staff/Rent/Phone.” The total expenditures were $3,494.38.
Source: New York City Campaign Finance Board
NYCC describes itself as a grassroots organization focused on community organizing, direct action, and legislative advocacy to address issues like housing, environmental justice, and community safety in New York.
They claim, “We are fighting for safe, affordable & stable homes and neighborhoods instead of evictions and displacement” and “A safe and thriving planet to build our communities on”.
There are distinctions in the IRS rules between 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations as regards political activity. The law regarding 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations is strict – non-profits cannot participate in any political activity.
James herself issued a press release in 2020 entitled “Attorney General James Issues Political Activity Guidance for Non-Profits Ahead of the November Election”. In the release, James lectured non-profits, warning them in advance of the 2020 election that they were strictly prohibited from engaging in any political activity.
NYCC was organized in New York as a 501(c)(4) in 2009 as a successor to ACORN. Corporations organized as 501(c)(4) are called “Social Welfare Non-Profits” and their donations are not tax deductible.
Operating for social welfare, according to the IRS, means that an organization must “operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.”
A 501(c)(4) can engage in some political activities, including advocacy and lobbying, but political work cannot be their primary activity.
They are allowed to engage in things like posting partisan political messages on social media, but they cannot directly support or oppose candidates for public office in a public manner.
While they may conduct independent political expenditures, they cannot coordinate with campaigns. Accordingly, political campaigns in the United States steer clear of 501(c)(4) organizations because they are prohibited from coordinating directly with political campaigns or candidates.
If a 501(c)(4) were to provide campaign workers or canvassing services to a candidate, it would be considered an in-kind contribution. Therefore, all the activities that Letitia James paid NYCC for in 2013, “Campaign Workers”, “Canvassing”, “Staffing”, and “Staff/Rent/Phone” were very likely not legal.
New York Attorney General Letitia James has consistently emphasized the importance of upholding the law. Her statements include “As the elected Attorney General of New York, I have a sworn duty to protect and uphold state law.
My office will follow the facts of any case, wherever they lead.” She has also said, “In New York, we value the rule of law, and my office will always work to ensure our laws are defended, no matter who attempts to sidestep or ignore them.”
Letitia James has repeatedly stated that “no one is above the law.” If she stands by that principle, then transparency around her campaign’s dealings with NYCC is the least New Yorkers deserve.
Were the payments legal? Was NYCC acting within its nonprofit mandate? Or did the Attorney General’s campaign improperly benefit from hiring a non-profit for political gain?
Only a full accounting – and perhaps an official investigation – can answer these questions definitively.
April 11, 2025 – Letitia’s problems are not isolated in New York state.
Revealed: NY Attorney General Letitia James Declares Virginia Home Her ‘Principal Residence’
Credit: Michael M Santiago/Getty Images
This article originally appeared on White Collar Fraud and was republished with permission.
Letitia James, New York’s Attorney General, has built her career on exposing deception. But a quiet real estate transaction in Norfolk, Virginia—carried out just weeks before the Trump fraud trial she championed—now raises serious questions about her own compliance with New York law.
A declaration buried in legal filings states her intent to make a Virginia house her principal residence:
“I HEREBY DECLARE that I intend to occupy this property as my principal residence.”
Those words appear in black and white in a Specific Power of Attorney, signed by James and filed in Norfolk on August 17, 2023, authorizing her relative Shamice Thompson-Hairston to act on her behalf in a transaction that included the declaration. They were not written by a lawyer acting on James’ behalf. They were her words. Her intent. Her signature.
This signed power of attorney is a smoking gun on its own, completely separate from how the mortgage might be interpreted. It stands as a clear declaration of intent from a sitting New York Attorney General to establish principal residency in another state.
While joint ownership arrangements sometimes involve owners with different primary residences, this case is different. The declaration in the power of attorney specifically states James’s intention to make the property her principal residence, and the mortgage requires both borrowers to establish residency. This raises questions about whether such a declaration was made primarily to secure preferential mortgage terms.
Importantly, this is not an isolated incident—discrepancies in James’s mortgage filings appear to follow a longer-term pattern, raising broader questions about disclosure consistency.
If James never intended to make the Norfolk property her principal residence despite signing a document explicitly stating that intention, the declaration may constitute misrepresentation under federal fraud statutes. This would be particularly problematic for someone who has prosecuted others for similar misrepresentations in property matters.
And this declaration came at a remarkable moment. Because on October 2—less than seven weeks later—James would take to the courtroom steps in Manhattan to announce the start of her landmark civil fraud case against Donald Trump. The trial would span months and dominate headlines. James would be in New York nearly every day.
The Facts
The Virginia property at 604 Sterling Street was purchased for $240,000 with a $219,780 mortgage. The deed lists James and Thompson-Hairston as co-owners in “joint tenancy with right of survivorship as at common law,” meaning both have equal ownership rights. The property is a 1,450 square foot single-family home with 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom, built in 1947.
The transaction was completed on August 30, 2023, with Thompson-Hairston signing the mortgage documents both for herself and as attorney-in-fact for James. What makes this transaction particularly troubling is that the mortgage documents require both borrowers to make the property their principal residence within 60 days (by approximately October 30, 2023) and maintain it for at least one year—placing the occupancy deadline squarely during the Trump trial.
This creates a direct conflict with James’ duties as New York Attorney General, where she maintained an active public presence throughout this period. The timing could not be more problematic—at the very moment she declared her intent to establish Virginia residency, she was preparing for her most high-profile case in New York.
The Legal Requirements
This isn’t simply a matter of having multiple homes. New York Public Officers Law § 3(1) is unambiguous: “No person shall be capable of holding a civil office who shall not… have resided in this state” for the required period. The State Constitution Article XIII, Section 13(a) specifically requires the Attorney General to be “a resident of the state for five years immediately preceding election.”
Furthermore, Public Officers Law § 30(1)(d) mandates that an office becomes vacant when the officeholder ceases “to be an inhabitant of the state.”
The consequences under New York law are immediate and severe: when an officeholder moves outside the required jurisdiction, they can no longer legally hold their position.
“When an officeholder removes his residence from the territorial limits required by statute, the office is rendered vacant.”
If James declared Virginia as her principal residence—which the power of attorney clearly shows was her intention—she may have triggered an automatic vacancy in the office of Attorney General under New York law—potentially invalidating her authority during the very period she was prosecuting her highest-profile case.
Financial Considerations
Beyond the legal implications, there are also financial questions surrounding this transaction. Standard mortgage requirements for owner-occupied properties, such as those documented in federal housing forms, typically offer substantially lower interest rates than investment properties—often 0.5-0.75 percentage points less, translating to thousands in savings on a $219,780 mortgage.
The financial motivation behind claiming a property as a primary residence is significant—and raises troubling questions about whether this declaration was made for financial benefit rather than reflecting actual living arrangements.
Disclosure Questions
The pattern of questionable documentation extends to James’ official disclosures. Her 2023 Financial Disclosure Statement includes an earlier Virginia property, 3121 Perrone Avenue, Norfolk from 2020, but nothing about the Sterling Street transaction. There is no reference to the Sterling Street property or the $219,780 mortgage in the 2023 FDS, despite its joint ownership and recent purchase date.
According to New York ethics guidelines, jointly owned real estate may be exempt from disclosure only if it is used solely as a primary or secondary residence and does not generate income. If the Sterling Street property is being rented or used as an investment, the omission could constitute a violation of public officers law.
The question becomes: How many undisclosed properties exist, and why the apparent effort to keep them off official records?
April 13, 2025 – Letitia’s bizarre daddy issues.
New for Letitia Files: Is Letitia James’ Rage Against Trump Really a “Daddy Issue?”
Guest post by Joel Gilbert
Letitia James has “Daddy issues”. The New York State Attorney General who hounded President Trump appears to have been acting out a vendetta against her own father. No rational explanation accounts for her reckless attacks on Trump, especially given her own checkered history of possibly illegal real estate transactions.
James’s father, Robert James, was born in South Carolina in 1916. He married Letitia’s mother, Nellie, and set out to build a future in New York City. They had eight children together, including Letitia. For many years, the sprawling family shared just 1,100 square feet of living space in a 2-bedroom 2-bath rental apartment at 44 Butler Place in Brooklyn.
44 Butler Place
When Letitia was a teen, her father abandoned the family and moved in with his girlfriend, Joyce Mosby.
Mother Nellie was left alone in their rental apartment to tend to her eight children, Letitia included. Nellie paid the bills from her job at AT&T where she would work for 25 years.
Although he never did buy a home for his wife and his eight children, Robert James bought a two-story detached frame single family home in 1979 with girlfriend Joyce Mosby at 114-32 167th Street in the Jamaica section of Queens, New York.
The home was situated on a 2,500 square foot lot and featured 1,280 square feet of living space. One can only imagine how her father’s abandonment for a girlfriend and a suburban home of their own made teenager Letitia feel.
114 167th Street
After graduating from Lehman College in the Bronx in 1982, with a major in social work, Letitia had had enough of living in a crowded two-bedroom family apartment. In 1983, she identified a small, 888-square-foot two-story townhome at 114-04 Inwood Street in Queens.
Leticia’s Inwood Street property
Letitia apparently recruited her father to pose as her husband in order to qualify for a loan to buy the home.
According to New York City Department of Finance records, on May 20, 1983, Letitia James and her father, Robert James, took out a real estate loan from Kadilac Funding Ltd for $30,300 as “husband and wife.”
The husband and wife borrowers can be seen in capital letters on the very top of the first page of the loan document and on the signature page, which reads “ROBERT JAMES AND LETITIA JAMES, HIS WIFE”.
It is illegal for a father and daughter to falsely represent themselves as husband and wife to obtain a mortgage loan. This would constitute mortgage fraud, which is a serious offense under federal and state laws.
Letitia and her father James signed a legal mortgage together in 1983 where she posed as his wife.
Mortgage fraud can include “False Representation,” defined as “providing misleading or false information on a loan application” and “Misrepresentation of Relationship,” defined as “lying about marital status to qualify for better loan terms.” It does not appear to have troubled James to put her father in harm’s way.
Here’s another document with Letitia signing as his father’s wife.
Letitia James lies and says she is married to her father on a mortgage loan.
Other than the fake paper marriage to her father, Letitia James has never been married. Even more curious, she has no obvious record of having dated anyone – boyfriend or girlfriend. There has been speculation about whether James is a lesbian, but there’s never been any evidence.
The post Here are The Gateway Pundit Reports and Legal Documents on Letitia James That Led Up Her Criminal Referral Tuesday to the Trump DOJ on Tuesday – Including Documents She Signed Alleging She Was Married to Her Father appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.