Left inset: DOJ's Ed Martin (@USAEdMartin/X). Main: Attorney General Letitia James talks to members of the press outside Brooklyn Hanson Place Seventh-day Adventist Church on Nov. 1, 2025, in Fort Greene, Brooklyn, three days before Election Day (Katie Godowski/MediaPunch/IPX).
Detailing a three-pronged Trump administration blitz to indict her for bank fraud, New York Attorney General Letitia James implored a federal judge to grant her potentially explosive discovery in the event that the jurist won't dismiss the "outrageous" case based on what she alleges about the origins of the prosecution.
In a 17-page dismissal motion based on "outrageous government conduct," stacking on top of a separate motion alleging selective and vindictive prosecution, the Democratic AG asserted that Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte, DOJ "Pardon Attorney/Special Attorney for Mortgage Fraud/Associate Deputy Attorney General/Director of the Weaponization Working Group" Ed Martin, and "purported" interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan "worked in concert to morph a threadbare theory into a federal prosecution" — to punish President Donald Trump's rival and show their loyalty.
Telling U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker that if he won't dismiss the case outright, based on "unprecedented, extensive, and outrageous misconduct," the jurist should at least order discovery of "all communications among and between President Trump, AG Bondi, Ms. Halligan, Mr. Martin, Director Pulte, and their staffs regarding AG James."
James first took aim at Pulte, claiming that the "three most likely possibilities" for what the FHFA director's DOJ criminal mortgage fraud referral relied upon would each qualify as "outrageous government conduct."
"The origin of the exhibits to the referral are equally suspect," the filing says. "The FHFA does not house individual mortgage documents in its own system, but Fannie Mae does. Many of the exhibits referenced in the referral were available from a single source (which also contains the only 'reporting' on the allegations that predate the referral letter): the blog of a right-wing 'investigator,' Sam Antar, who has claimed credit for providing Director Pulte with the facts necessary for the criminal referral," the filing said. "Accordingly, in crafting the criminal referral letter and the attached exhibits, Director Pulte either (1) relied exclusively on a single fringe blogger's 'evidence' that AG James committed fraud, (2) took it upon himself to purchase these documents from various county clerk offices, or (3) unlawfully accessed AG James's loan files from Fannie Mae's database."
Martin, mocked for wearing an "Inspector Gadget-inspired beige trenchcoat" on a summer day while "stalk[ing]" the AG's Brooklyn home in August with friendly media "in tow," gave away the game when he tried to pressure James to resign or else face prosecution, the filing continued.
"On August 12, 2025, while a pending investigation was underway that Mr. Martin was supposed to be leading, he sent AG James's counsel a letter insisting that she 'resign from office' because, in his view, it 'would best serve the 'good of the state and nation" and 'give the people of New York and America more peace than proceeding,'" court documents said. "Mr. Martin also stated that '[he] would take this as an act of good faith' if she were to resign from office."
Claiming that Martin ran roughshod over the Professional Rules of Responsibility, particularly Rule 3.8's "special responsibilities of a prosecutor," James' motion alleged that Martin did not attempt to "be objective in seeking the facts and applying the correct law," but instead "orchestrated a bizarre media stunt" complete with "strange antics" by showing up with a New York Post photographer in the AG's neighborhood.
Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.
"The Post, with a photographer in tow, was there to capture the moment for Mr. Martin, adorned in an Inspector Gadget-inspired beige trenchcoat, in the middle of an August summer day. And in what could only reasonably be construed as an attempt to intimidate AG James, a few days later, Mr. Martin posted a photo of himself in front of her home on his official DOJ X account," the filing said. "It is clear Mr. Martin—a high-ranking official in the United States Department of Justice—undertook these strange antics to intimidate and prejudice AG James outside the bounds of DOJ and relevant ethics rules."
"There is no conceivable legitimate reason for Mr. Martin to stalk AG James's home," the filing continued, slamming Martin's remark to James' neighbors that he was "just happy to be on a block looking at houses … just looking at houses, interesting houses."
Turning next to Halligan — "Whose Only Credential is Loyalty," a subheading said — James claimed Pulte and Martin boosted their profiles in the Oval Office and online after the rookie prosecutor convinced a grand jury to indict in a case, whose "legal viability" reportedly didn't satisfy former interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Erik Siebert or Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former defense attorney turned No. 2 official at the DOJ.
"Ms. Halligan alone went before a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia—not in Norfolk, where grand jurors had heard evidence and witnesses for months—and left with a two-count indictment against AG James bearing the exact calculations Director Pulte had sent to Ms. Halligan just a few days prior. 'Minutes after James was indicted, Pulte came into the Oval Office to boast that he and Halligan had pulled it off on their own,' according to the Wall Street Journal," the filing added. "That evening, Mr. Martin posted on X, 'Promises made, Promises kept.'"
Repeating the argument that Halligan was unlawfully appointed for the purpose of indicting Trump's "political enemies," James cited case law noting that the kind of "outrageous government conduct" that typically gets an indictment dismissed involves "pure brutality" that "shocks the conscience," like "torture" or criminal activity. The AG acknowledged that the alleged circumstances here amount to an "issue of first impression" — that is, uncharted territory.
"Whether the government's willingness to abuse its power and break its own rules and systems to obtain this indictment can sufficiently 'shock the conscience' to require dismissal of an indictment is an issue of first impression," the filing concluded. "As the facts illustrate, Director Pulte, Mr. Martin, AG Bondi, and Ms. Halligan do not believe themselves bound by the Constitution, federal statutes, or fundamental ethical norms."
Follow Law&Crime:
