December 20, 2021

Donald Trump Sues New York AG Tish James for Asking Too Many Questions

“Our investigation will continue undeterred because no one is above the law, not even someone with the name Trump.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks during a rally in support of living wages for home care workers in New York, Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2021. AP Photo/Seth Wenig

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Donald Trump on Monday filed a lawsuit against New York Attorney General Letitia James that essentially accuses of her of investigating him too vigorously. The lawsuit asks a judge to stop James’ long-running civil investigation into the Trump Organization’s finances and punish the AG for her “callous acts” that have supposedly deprived Trump, his company, and his family of their constitutional rights. But in reality, the lawsuit is mostly a laundry list of times that James has publicly said she would try to hold Trump accountable. It also notes she has filed a lot of subpoenas in the process of investigating Trump.

James’ investigation, which stared in early 2019, appears to be focused on whether the Trump Organization committed tax, bank, and insurance fraud. Based on the subpoenas her office has filed—the contents of which are public because the Trump family has unsuccessfully challenged most of them—she has been scrutinizing whether the Trump Organization improperly valued conservation easements, whether the company paid its taxes in connection with certain deals, and whether the company improperly inflated the value of its properties when seeking bank loans. 

Trump claims in the lawsuit that James knew her investigation was “unsupported, unjustified, and unfounded in fact or in law.” Trump’s attorneys say that other state attorneys general—citing Louisiana’s Jeff Landry, a close Trump ally—think it’s a politically-motivated “fishing expedition.” The entire investigation, Trump’s suit contends, is “motivated by malice, political animus, and a desire to harass, intimidate, threaten, oppress, coerce, injure and/or retaliate against Trump and his business, the Trump Organization.”

Among the evidence Trump’s lawyers cite is a clip from an appearance James made on The View in which host Joy Behar pressed James on her investigation into Trump.  “There are reports that you are trying to depose Trump under oath next month, tell me that’s true,” Behar said to James, who laughed in response.

“Defendant put her personal disdain for Trump on full display by responding to Behar’s comment with laughter,” Trump’s lawsuit contends.

Trump’s suit also argues that the investigation is politically driven because a motion to compel Eric Trump to sit for an interview with investigators was filed on the first day of the 2020 GOP national convention. 

But Trump has already tried to make that argument, as well as the broader argument that James’ investigation is a “fishing expedition.” Eric Trump was subpoenaed in May 2020 and had voluntarily agreed to speak with investigators, until he abruptly refused shortly before the GOP convention was set to begin. James’ motion to compel him to speak came only after weeks of negotiating. He later agreed to testify, but only after the election was over, saying James was playing politics with the timing. The judge in the case disagreed:

[Judge Arthur] Engoron rejected that argument on Wednesday, saying Trump’s attorneys had failed to offer any support for that argument and ordering the Trump Organization to comply with the New York AG’s requests.

“This court finds that application unpersuasive, Mr. Trump cites no authority in support of his request and in any event neither petitioner nor court is bound by timelines of the national election,” he said.

The Trump Organization did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, but James’ office said the lawsuit was another blatant attempt to delay her investigation.

“The Trump Organization has continually sought to delay our investigation into its business dealings and now Donald Trump and his namesake company have filed a lawsuit as an attempted collateral attack on that investigation,” James said in a statement. “To be clear, neither Mr. Trump nor the Trump Organization get to dictate if and where they will answer for their actions. Our investigation will continue undeterred because no one is above the law, not even someone with the name Trump.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate