Justice Department urged to Investigate Accuser in Schiff Mortgage Dispute
A legal battle is escalating โขsurrounding accusations of mortgageโข fraud leveled against Senator Adam Schiff by former President Donald Trump. Preet โBharara, Schiff’s attorney, has formally requested the Department of Justiceโข investigate Timothy Pulte, the head of Fannie Mae, alleging a politically motivated and “highly irregular” effort to discredit theโ Senator.The controversyโค stems from aโข review conductedโฃ byโค Fannie Mae investigators, prompted byโ a request from the Federal Housing finance agency inspector general’sโ office. Investigators examined loan โขfiles related to two properties owned by Schiff – a home in Potomac, Maryland, and a unit in Burbank, California – and found a “sustained pattern of possible occupancy โคmisrepresentation” between 2009 and 2020.The investigators noted Schiffโ and his wife had simultaneously identified both properties as their primary residence.โ However, they stopped short of concluding a crime had been committed.
Trump seized onโค these findings, publicly accusing Schiff of mortgage fraud. Schiff’s legal team responded swiftly, asserting “noโค factual basis” for the claims. Bharara’s detailed letter to the Justice Department outlines a robust defense, arguing that Schiff acted transparently and within legal guidelines.
Central โto the โคdefense isโข a 2010 letter Schiff sent to his โฃlender, Quicken Loans, during a โrefinancing.โ in the letter, Schiff โฃexplained โฃthat while California was โคhis “principal โขlegal residence” for โฃtax purposes, heโค had been advisedโฃ by both legal counsel and the House Management Committeeโ that the Marylandโ home could be considered a primary residence for โinsurance underwriting due โto family occupancy.Bharara characterizes this as a “obvious disclosure,”โฃ directly contradicting accusationsโค of misrepresentation.
Moreover, Bharara contends that even if inaccuracies existed in Schiff’s mortgage applicationsโฃ – wich he vehemently denies – the statute of limitations for prosecution has โฃexpired. The most recent application citedโค byโฃ Pulte isโค over twelve years old, exceeding the ten-year limit.
However, Bharara’s letter goes beyond defending โSchiff, focusing heavily on the conduct of Timothy Pulte. he alleges that the Fannie Mae inspector general’s inquiry into Schiff’s records was initiated “at Mr. Pulte’s behest.” He further claims โคPulte personally referred the matter toโฃ the Justice Department before receiving the Fannie Mae unit’s findings, raising concerns about a pre-determined outcome.
Bhararaโ also points to the timing of the criminal referral, which was made public amidst heightened scrutiny of President โคTrump’s connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting a intentional attempt โขto divert attention. The public โฃrelease of Schiff’s address,a directโ consequence of the accusations,forced โtheโ Senator to increase his security measures โand prompted the launch of a legal defense โfund.Concluding that pulte has demonstrated a “pattern” of โข”misusing his office” to โtarget Trump’s political โadversaries,Bharara urges the Justice Department to investigate Pulte’s actions instead of pursuing a case โagainst Schiff. He argues that opening anโฃ investigation based on these “deficient facts” would be a “deeply partisan and unjust act,” and ultimately “unworthy of the Department of Justice.”
