New York Attorney General Letitia James has adopted a novel approach to address the serious allegations of mortgage fraud leveled against her.
In a recent appearance alongside Joy Reid, a controversial figure and former MSNBC host, James suggested that the Department of Justice (DOJ) should cease their investigation, labeling it as "baseless.".
The intriguing aspect of this situation is not whether James committed the alleged fraud, but her assertion that the DOJ lacks the evidence to prove her intent, thereby rendering their pursuit futile. According to RedState, during her conversation with Reid, James stated, "It's baseless because in order to prove mortgage fraud, one has to prove intent and that's a very high standard, a very hard high"
James further elaborated on her stance, stating, "Donald Trump said that he wanted, he said that I was, he called me all kind of names, and he basically directed the DOJ to investigate my affairs. And they're using mortgage fraud as the vehicle upon which they are investigating myself, Adam Schiff, Mrs. Cook, Lisa Cook, and countless others, and it is, most of it, as you know, is frivolous, it's baseless because in order to prove mortgage fraud, one has to prove intent, and that's a very high standard, high bar to meet."
While James' defense strategy is now clear should the DOJ decide to press charges, her audacious approach of dismissing her alleged criminality based on a lack of proof of intent raises eyebrows. Yes, proving intent is a crucial aspect of such cases, but James' insinuation that her actions were purely accidental and devoid of any evidence of intent is misleading.
It strains credulity to believe that James, a seasoned attorney, was unaware of her actions when she erroneously listed a man as her husband on a mortgage application. This is not a common mistake. Furthermore, when it comes to establishing intent, a pattern of illegal activities can serve as compelling evidence. James allegedly misrepresented a New York City rental property, claiming it had four bedrooms instead of five, conveniently securing a lower interest rate. In 2023, she reportedly claimed a house as her primary residence, once again obtaining a lower interest rate.
The question then arises: Is James the most negligent attorney general in American history, or was she knowingly manipulating the system to secure lower interest rates and save money? While ignorance can serve as a defense, the notion that proving intent is impossible is far-fetched. If this were true, every fraudster could simply claim ignorance and evade conviction. However, we know that people are convicted of fraud, and it doesn't necessitate a written confession to establish intent. The DOJ appears to have sufficient material to demonstrate that James was fully aware of her actions.
James' accountability is crucial. She has allegedly exploited the law against her political adversaries in egregious ways and now seems to consider herself above it. This sets a perilous precedent. It is incumbent upon the DOJ to take decisive action in this matter.
Login