Response to NY Daily News Editorial on AG Letitia James
On April 20, 2025, the New York Daily News editorial board published a piece dismissing the mounting legal and ethical questions facing New York Attorney General Letitia James as “flimsy claims of fraud” and “petty payback” for her civil case against Donald Trump. This editorial mischaracterizes the documented evidence and sidesteps the broader legal obligations James faces—not as a political figure, but as a sworn public official subject to financial disclosure, mortgage fraud, and residency laws. This response sets the record straight.
1. The Virginia “Principal Residence” Declaration Is Not a Mere Technicality
The Daily News claims James merely “helped her niece buy” a Virginia home and that a “purchase agreement,” not the mortgage, listed it as her “principal residence.” But this framing is flat-out false.
The document was not a purchase agreement. It was a Specific Power of Attorney, signed by Letitia James on August 17, 2023 and recorded in Virginia land records. The language is unambiguous:
“I HEREBY DECLARE that I intend to occupy this property as my principal residence.”
The mortgage she authorized required both borrowers to occupy the property as their principal residence within 60 days and maintain it for at least one year. This document was officially recorded in Norfolk property records and served as the basis for mortgage underwriting, demonstrating that the loan was granted based on James’ false representation. This declaration was made just weeks before she launched her landmark civil fraud case against Trump on October 2, 2023. Under New York Public Officers Law § 30(1)(d), an official who ceases to reside in New York vacates their office by operation of law.
Read full investigation: Exclusive: NY AG Declares Virginia Home Principal Residence
2. The Brooklyn Unit Count Discrepancy Is a Two-Decade Pattern—Not a “Corrected Error”
The editorial suggests James’s misclassification of her Brooklyn property was inherited from a “previous owner.” This excuse is demonstrably false for several key reasons:
First, the official Certificate of Occupancy issued January 26, 2001—two weeks before she bought the property—clearly identifies it as a five-family dwelling. This C/O was issued after proper Department of Buildings inspection that specifically confirmed the five-unit status.
Second, James herself signed every mortgage document, permit application, and loan filing that consistently misrepresented the property as having fewer units. This wasn’t a one-time error but a pattern spanning more than 20 years across dozens of official filings.
Third, when this discrepancy was reported to authorities, they dismissed it as a “MINOR ERROR”—a response that ordinary New Yorkers rarely receive for similar violations.
Preferential Treatment from NYC Department of Buildings
Perhaps most troubling is the selective enforcement shown in this case. When a complaint was filed specifically about the discrepancy between James’ property’s Certificate of Occupancy (five units) and her permit applications (claiming four units), the Department of Buildings dismissed it as a “MINOR ERROR” despite the complaint explicitly stating:
“THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY – APPLICATIONS LIST THE BUILDING AS A 4 FAMILY BUT C OF O INDICATES A 5 FAMILY DWELLING. PERMIT APPLICATIONS SIGNED BY LETITIA JAMES APPEAR TO CONTAIN FALSE INFORMATION.”
For ordinary New Yorkers, such discrepancies trigger serious consequences:
- Immediate stop-work orders
- Substantial financial penalties
- Expensive remediation requirements
- In some cases, forced vacancy until compliance is achieved
In one documented case, when tenants discovered their building contained more units than listed on its Certificate of Occupancy, the DOB required “the presence of 24/7 fire guards as a condition of continued occupancy,” and courts supported tenants who organized a rent strike over the violation.
This misrepresentation allowed James to access residential mortgage products and federal relief programs reserved for 1–4 unit properties, which offer more favorable terms than commercial loans.
The pattern of misclassification isn’t isolated or accidental—it spans the entire period of James’ ownership and appears in numerous official documents. Looking at the chronological timeline of these misrepresentations reveals a consistent, two-decade pattern of incorrectly describing the property’s unit count:
- June 21, 2021: Citizens Bank NA – “Dwelling Only – 1 or 2 Family Residence or Dwelling”
- August 23, 2019: Citibank NA – “Dwelling Only – 4 Family”
- October 26, 2017: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. – “Dwelling Only – 4 Family”
- January 26, 2015: The Municipal Credit Union – “Dwelling Only – 4 Family”
- August 23, 2011: US Bank NA, as Trustee – “4 Fam.” (handwritten)
- May 25, 2007: American General Home Equity, Inc. – “Property Improved by a 1–2 Family Residence or Dwelling”
- October 26, 2006: American General Home Equity, Inc. – “Improved by 1–3 Family Dwelling”
- July 1, 2005: MERS – “Dwelling Only – 4 Family”
- August 29, 2003: MERS – “Premises Improved by 4 Family Dwelling”
- March 30, 2001: Chase Manhattan Bank – “Premises Improved by One or Two Family”
Full analysis: Letitia James’ Mortgage Misclassification Just Got Worse
3. Her Financial Disclosures Are Riddled with Omissions and Contradictions
New York Public Officers Law § 73-a requires elected officials to disclose all real estate, debts over $10,000, and all mortgages or home equity lines secured by income-producing properties. These disclosures aren’t optional formalities but legal statements signed under penalty of perjury. The purpose is clear: to ensure transparency and prevent conflicts of interest among public officials who make and enforce state laws.
James, as New York’s chief legal officer, should understand these requirements better than most. Yet her filings from 2020 to 2023 contain serious red flags:
A. Omitted Mortgages
In 2020, James purchased 3121 Peronne Avenue in Norfolk with a $109,600 mortgage. It was never disclosed—despite being used as a rental property.
In 2023, she suddenly reported two different mortgages—Freedom Mortgage and National Mortgage—totaling up to $400,000. Neither appears in any Virginia land records.
She also failed to report the $219,780 mortgage on 604 Sterling Street in 2023—despite New York disclosure laws requiring officials to report all debts exceeding $10,000 and despite this being the mortgage that was obtained based on her declaration to make Virginia her “principal residence.”
B. Misclassified or Disappearing Loans (Brooklyn Property)
- Citibank HELOC (2019): Recorded in NYC ACRIS but not disclosed in 2019, 2020, or 2021. Appeared in 2022 misclassified as a mortgage, then vanished again in 2023 with no record of satisfaction.
- Citizens Bank Loan (2021): Not disclosed in 2021. Reported in 2022 as a mortgage. Reclassified as a home equity loan in 2023, with no public filing explaining the change.
- First Savings Bank Loan: Listed on disclosures since 2020, but no such mortgage or HELOC has ever been recorded under that name in ACRIS.
C. Inconsistent Disclosures on Brooklyn Property
- Her filings list 296 Lafayette as producing $20,000–$50,000 in rental income, but show shifting loan balances, missing mortgage records, and unexplained lender names.
Full breakdown: Accountability on Trial: Letitia James’ Shocking Financial Disclosure Failures
D. The Overleveraging of Peronne Avenue—and Insurance Implications
James’s 2023 disclosure reports up to $400,000 in loans on a property she values at just $100,000–$150,000—a loan-to-value ratio of up to 400%.
If the loans don’t exist, she made false statements to regulators. If they do exist and were issued based on inflated valuations or misrepresented occupancy status, this could violate federal lending and insurance fraud statutes.
More: Exposing a Decade of Letitia James’ Financial Misreporting
E. The Federal HAMP Loan Modification Issue
Perhaps the most troubling financial discrepancy involves the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) loan that James received in 2011. HAMP was a federal program explicitly limited to properties with four or fewer units, as clearly stated in the program guidelines.
Despite her property being officially classified as a five-family dwelling on its Certificate of Occupancy, James obtained a HAMP modification with suspicious handwritten additions. The mortgage document contains “4 fam” hastily written in one corner, while another section has a handwritten note stating the property contains “…not more than 6 residential units” – creating deliberate ambiguity about the property’s status.
These modifications appear to be last-minute additions designed to maintain technical eligibility for the federal program while acknowledging the property’s true nature in a way that provided plausible deniability. By misrepresenting her five-unit building as having only four units, James potentially obtained tens of thousands of dollars in mortgage payment reductions she wasn’t legally entitled to receive.
The Daily News dismisses this as a “technical paperwork issue,” but falsifying information on federal relief program applications carries serious consequences for ordinary citizens, including potential criminal liability under 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits false statements to federally insured financial institutions.
4. Luxury Travel on Taxpayer and Campaign Dime
Between 2020 and 2021, James’s office spent $41,807.80 in taxpayer money on private jets through a vendor used by no other state agency. When public scrutiny increased, her campaign picked up the slack—spending $12,049 on the same jet company.
Records also show thousands in luxury hotel stays during campaign season, sometimes classified as “office” or “transportation.”
Jet travel investigation: Letitia James Spent $41K on Private Jets
Campaign accounting patterns: Luxury Campaign Spending With Creative Accounting
5. This Investigation Is Independent—Not Orchestrated by Trump
The Daily News editorial tries to delegitimize these findings by tying them to Donald Trump. But the record is clear: this investigation was conducted independently and long predates any involvement by Trump or his legal team.
About the Author
I, Sam E. Antar, conducted this research as an independent investigator with specialized expertise in financial fraud detection. As the former CFO of Crazy Eddie, I’ve spent decades helping law enforcement, corporations, investors, and researchers understand how financial fraud works from the inside.
My work with federal agencies (including the Department of Justice, FBI, and SEC) has provided unique insights into financial deception. I’ve taught classes to the FBI, IRS, and Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and served as an expert witness in civil and criminal cases.
I use this experience to analyze public records, mortgage documents, land filings, and sworn ethics disclosures—uncovering patterns that others might miss. My investigations are self-funded, independent, and driven solely by public interest in transparency and accountability.
I have no affiliation with Trump or his attorneys. I have never met him, never spoken to him, and never worked for him. I began reporting on James’ property and disclosure irregularities as early as 2023—long before the Federal Housing Finance Agency made its April 2025 criminal referral to the Department of Justice. That referral cited some of the very same documents I originally uncovered and published.
I don’t take political sides in my investigations—I follow the paper trail. For over 30 years, I’ve worked with both Republican and Democratic administrations to combat fraud, because financial integrity isn’t a partisan issue.
Rather than confront the documented facts, the Daily News opted to smear the messenger. That’s not journalism. It’s evasion.
Final Thought
Letitia James is not above the law she enforces. The public records do not lie. Either she misrepresented key facts to lenders, regulators, and voters—or the laws she claims to uphold are meaningless. The Daily News is entitled to its opinions—but not to its own facts.
As James herself so powerfully told us in her recent statement, “I will not bow to anyone.” Neither will I.
If the editors wish to defend James, they should start by acknowledging the documented discrepancies—not erasing them.
For a comprehensive overview of all documented evidence in this ongoing investigation, see my full report: The Case Against NY Attorney General Letitia James To Date
Written by,
Sam Antar
© 2025 Sam Antar. All rights reserved.