Prosecutor Blows Whistle on Letitia James’ Office, Says He Was Told to Target Trump and ‘Find Crimes

By Lucretia Hughes Klucken

ALBANY, N.Y. — A prosecutor in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office has accused his supervisors of directing him to target President Donald Trump, his associates and politically connected companies before identifying credible evidence that a crime had been committed.

Assistant Attorney General Daniel Wiesenfeld made the extraordinary allegations in an internal email sent Friday to more than 2,000 employees of James’ office, according to a copy obtained by the Albany Times Union.

The message was reportedly deleted from the agency’s computer system shortly after it was distributed. Wiesenfeld was then placed on paid administrative leave.

Wiesenfeld is a New York state assistant attorney general, not a federal prosecutor, as some initial social media reports claimed. He works in the attorney general’s Investor Protection Bureau and previously served as an assistant district attorney in Brooklyn.

In the email, Wiesenfeld alleged that his bureau chief, Shamiso Maswoswe, instructed him “to find and pursue crimes committed by specific individuals and organizations affiliated with Donald Trump.”

Those targets allegedly included Trump, Truth Social and Hewlett Packard.

Wiesenfeld said the directive was issued “without having a credible reason for targeting” the individuals and organizations.

That wording is important. Wiesenfeld did not publicly establish that absolutely no evidence existed. He alleged that he was ordered to search for crimes without a credible factual basis for selecting the targets.

If true, that would turn the proper role of a prosecutor upside down.

Law enforcement is supposed to begin with evidence of possible wrongdoing and follow that evidence wherever it leads. It is not supposed to select a political opponent first and then begin searching for something — anything — that could be labeled a crime.

“Instead, I hope you choose to prosecute crimes and find the individuals accountable, rather than targeting individuals and then finding crimes,” Wiesenfeld wrote.

That is the heart of the allegation.

Wiesenfeld also accused James of spending significant amounts of taxpayer money pursuing politically convenient enemies while failing to address what he described as rampant fraud involving nonprofit homeless shelters and antisemitic offenses near synagogues.

“If you believe Trump is using Department of Justice attorneys to prosecute his enemies and further his political interests, you should find it equally troubling that Tish is doing exactly the same thing,” Wiesenfeld wrote, referring to James by her nickname.

James’ office rejected his accusations.

“This is a personnel matter, and the employee in question has been placed on administrative leave with full pay,” spokesperson Alexis Richards said. “The Office of the Attorney General is committed to upholding New York’s laws and protecting the rights and freedoms of all New Yorkers, regardless of political beliefs. We strongly reject any assertion to the contrary.”

The office has not publicly released records showing what evidence, if any, supported the investigative assignments described by Wiesenfeld. Maswoswe also has not publicly responded in detail to his allegations.

Wiesenfeld’s message raises serious questions that cannot be answered simply by calling the controversy a personnel matter.

Was he directed to investigate Trump and Trump-affiliated organizations? What evidence supported those directives? Who approved the investigations? Were subpoenas issued, taxpayer funds spent or confidential records reviewed? Why was his email removed from employees’ inboxes?

Those questions require documents, testimony and independent examination.

James has a long and openly hostile political history with Trump.

During her 2018 campaign for attorney general, James promised to investigate Trump and his business operations. Her office later brought the civil fraud case that resulted in a judge finding Trump and others liable for improperly inflating property values and other assets.

A trial judge imposed a penalty of more than $450 million with interest. A New York appeals court later upheld the fraud finding but threw out the massive financial penalty as excessive.

Trump has repeatedly accused James of campaigning on a promise to prosecute him and then using the power of her office to deliver on that political pledge.

James has denied acting for political reasons and has maintained that her office followed the evidence and enforced the same laws that would apply to anyone else.

Wiesenfeld’s accusations do not automatically prove that James personally ordered an unlawful or politically motivated investigation. His email presents one employee’s account, and the allegations have not been tested in court or confirmed through sworn testimony.

But he is not an outside political commentator guessing about what occurred inside the office. He is an assistant attorney general who says he received the directives himself.

That makes his allegations impossible to dismiss without a serious investigation.

The controversy also exposes the hypocrisy surrounding the weaponization of government.

James and her supporters have accused Trump of using the Justice Department to pursue political enemies. Wiesenfeld’s message argues that employees of James’ office should apply the same standard to their own leadership.

Political affiliation does not change the principle.

It is wrong for a Republican administration to select an enemy and hunt for a charge. It is equally wrong for a Democratic attorney general to select Trump or his associates and order prosecutors to “find crimes.”

The rule of law cannot mean one standard for allies and another for opponents.

Wiesenfeld has now been sidelined while the people he accused remain in control of the office and its records. That does not establish that retaliation occurred, but it makes transparency even more urgent.

New York lawmakers should demand preservation of the email, investigative assignments, internal communications and supporting records. An independent authority should determine whether Wiesenfeld’s account is accurate and whether taxpayer-funded investigations were opened without legitimate cause.

Until that happens, James’ office cannot credibly close the matter by describing it as an internal employment dispute.

A prosecutor says he was told to target a president and people connected to him, then search for crimes.

That is not merely a personnel matter.

That is an allegation of political lawfare — and the public deserves the truth.