During a recent segment on Friday night, Greg Kelly welcomed Joel Gilbert, a film producer and independent investigative journalist, to delve into Gilbert’s extensive findings concerning Letitia James and her alleged long-standing engagement in mortgage fraud.
Greg Kelly: Joel Gilbert, it’s a pleasure to have you here. Your insights have played a significant role in bringing this matter to light. How do you feel knowing that your investigative work has led to genuine legal scrutiny?
Joel Gilbert: It’s gratifying to see the fruits of my labor recognized by legal authorities. Since March, I’ve amassed extensive evidence indicating that Letitia James may have been involved in a consistent pattern of mortgage fraud dating back to 1983, when she was merely 24 years old. She even went so far as to claim she had married her father to qualify for a mortgage on her first townhome purchase.
There’s a clear pattern at play. She cannot argue a lack of intention or ignorance of the law, as she has pursued others in New York for similar infractions. In fact, she’s claimed that even a minor error on a mortgage application constitutes a serious crime, which is precisely what she’s accused Donald Trump of. In light of this, I anticipate more significant indictments regarding her properties in Virginia, along with major charges related to her fraudulent practices concerning a Brooklyn apartment building.
Greg Kelly: It certainly seems deserved. After all, she launched a dubious, disingenuous lawsuit against Trump. Some viewers might wonder if her current spotlight indicates she’s in less jeopardy, perhaps safeguarded from repercussions. My instincts tell me that this scenario could actually be perilous for her; real legal ramifications could follow, from incarceration to potentially losing her law license.
Joel Gilbert: Letitia is attempting to deflect responsibility, alleging that Trump is weaponizing the judicial system against her. However, she has been engaging in a blatant strategy of mortgage fraud for 24 years across two states involving four properties to secure unjust financial advantages.
This includes a loan she accessed through the government’s HAMP program under TARP back in 2011. Interestingly, she approached the government about waiving her 10% private bank loan to instead benefit from a mere 2.7% interest rate, all while claiming financial distress despite earning $14,000 monthly. Her deceit even extended to asserting she only owned four housing units.
Given the extensive duration, the multitude of infractions, and the consistent pattern established, I genuinely doubt her ability to escape this predicament. I believe she may end up needing to negotiate a plea deal, especially when faced with a barrage of forthcoming indictments that could be overwhelming. Her strategies—complete with dramatic posturing reminiscent of a civil rights leader from the 1960s—are unconvincing and likely inadequate.
The complete interview is available below.
Letitia’s situation appears precarious.
