Latest news with #politicalRetribution
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's Vile, Corrupt Attack on Adam Schiff Is Already Backfiring
This week, President Donald Trump raged on Truth Social that Senator Adam Schiff is guilty of 'Mortgage Fraud,' and demanded that he be 'brought to justice.' The basis for this claim: Fannie Mae has made a criminal referral to the Justice Department involving several properties owned by the first-term California Democrat. Many stories on this dutifully reported Trump's allegations of corruption, and then followed up with Schiff's response: That the charges are bogus and constitute retribution against a longtime Trump critic who argued the case for his impeachment in the House during his first term. This framing makes it a story about Schiff's conduct. But the real story here is Trump's conduct. It's how this allegation came to be in the first place. It's the role that Trump and/or the White House played in getting the federal bureaucracy to arrange events to the point where the president of the United States could pronounce a sitting U.S. senator and political enemy a target for potential prosecution. Understood this way, the story is likely a dry run for much more like this to come. The unnerving outlines of that story are already visible. The allegations, in a nutshell, are that Schiff falsely designated his Maryland home in the suburbs of Washington D.C. a primary residence even as his real primary home is in California. This allegedly secured Schiff a cheaper mortgage. Fannie Mae referred this to DOJ, and Trump followed up with this, an apparent message to DOJ that it should prosecute: Schiff flatly denies the claim. His spokesperson says Schiff has always been open about owning year-round residences in both Maryland and California. Keeping one residence in a home state or district and renting or owning a second place to stay in or around D.C. is standard for members of Congress. But where did the allegation initially come from? A Los Angeles Times reporter obtained a memo authored by the Fannie Mae Crimes Unit and sent to the head of the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA), which oversees the government-backed Fannie Mae. The memo lays out the basis for those charges, but as the Times piece on this reports, the memo nowhere says that Schiff committed 'fraud,' as Trump claimed. Even more interestingly, the memo also says this inquiry resulted after the FHFA's office of inspector general (OIG) made a 'Document Demand' from the Fannie Mae Crimes Unit—a demand for documents related to 'all' loans 'associated with' Schiff. Experts in how inspectors general function said in interviews that this chain of events seems unusual and troubling. The FHFA inspector general obviously investigates mortgage fraud, they noted, but they asked how—and why—this inspector general might have come to make this specific request involving this specific U.S. Senator's loans. 'From beginning to end, this process is highly irregular,' Michael Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general who's still well regarded by government insiders, told me. Making this stranger, these issues involving Schiff have been aired before, during his 2024 Senate campaign, when multiple of Schiff's Fannie Mae loans and residences came to light. As CNN reported at the time, his spokesperson argued that it was appropriate to describe both residences as primary because they both function that way for the Schiffs (and also to distinguish them from a vacation home). The Fannie Mae memo itself is squirrelly with its charges. It claims that Schiff 'possibly' misrepresented his homes on multiple loans. Read through Trump's whole tweet on this and it's clear that someone or other created a tidy package of these charges and handed them to Trump—or whoever wrote this tweet—to translate into this missive. How did that happen? Experts also point out that the memo shows that the response to the inspector general's request was forwarded to the head of FHFA—William Pulte, a Trump political appointee and loyalist. 'It is extremely unusual for the response to any IG document request to go to the head of the agency rather than back to the OIG—I have never heard of that,' Bromwich told me. 'So far as I know, it is unprecedented for such raw information to be forwarded to the White House. Responses to OIG requests simply don't go to the White House—ever.' Did anyone at the White House urge this inspector general to make this document request involving Schiff? Did anyone at the White House quietly hint to Fannie Mae that it should criminally refer this matter to DOJ? Is anyone making an offhand suggestion to DOJ that it open a criminal investigation on this basis? 'The creation of an investigation into a high government official is extraordinarily unusual for a Fannie Mae inspector general,' Don Kettl, former Dean of the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, told me. 'What drove this through the bureaucracy? What drove it to DOJ? How did the story find its way into the president's social media feed?' Making this worse, this tactic is already emerging as a model. As Talking Points Memo's David Kurtz points out, Trump alleged mortgage fraud against New York attorney general Letitia James, who sued the Trump Organization for fraud, via similar channels. 'Inspectors general are supposed to serve as checks on the president, but it looks like Trump is weaponizing them to attack his political opponents,' Brown University professor Corey Brettschneider, an expert on presidential power, tells me. Meanwhile, over at The Bulwark, Jonathan Last writes about another sordid tale involving a former FBI special agent who was pushed out because he was friends with someone on Trumpist FBI director Kash Patel's enemies list. As Last notes, this couldn't happen without little-known functionaries below Patel being willing to carry out dubious orders. So on this Schiff matter, are any Trump political appointees at FHFA or Fannie Mae proving, shall we say, very receptive to White House suggestions of investigative targets? Are they eagerly moving these suggestions through the bureaucracy? These questions are all critical to answer even if you believe the charges against Schiff will end up having something to them (which they probably won't). What's more, Democrats need to communicate clearly to the public that instances like these are part of a bigger story: Trump is corrupting the bureaucracy—corrupting the people's government—by seeding it with loyalists at all levels who are willing to manipulate it to carry out his crazed vendettas. As Brian Beutler explains, this sort of deep corruption of multiple agencies will inevitably create a need later to 'de-Trumpify' them. Democrats should loudly let it be known right now that anyone who is carrying out corrupt orders—or illegal ones—will not be able to hide behind bureaucratic obscurity later. They will be held accountable—politically, or if needed, legally as well. There are a lot of lingering questions about this whole Schiff mess. And when we start getting real answers to them, one suspects that this story will not look like the one Trump initially set out to tell.
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Student loan cancellation program could become Trump retribution tool, some advocates fear
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is reshaping a student loan cancellation program into what some fear will become a tool for political retribution, taking aim at organizations that serve immigrants and transgender youth. The Education Department is preparing an overhaul of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program that would strip the benefit from organizations involved in 'illegal activities" and allow the U.S. education secretary to decide which should lose eligibility. A draft proposal released by the department includes definitions of illegal activity that center on immigration, terrorism and transgender issues. Several advocates invited to weigh in on the draft proposal raised concerns it would give the department subjective authority to decide if an organization is engaged in anything illegal — a power that could be used to remove entire hospital systems or state governments from the program. 'That's definitely an indicator for me that this is politically motivated and perhaps will be used as a tool for political punishment,' said Betsy Mayotte, president of the Institute of Student Loan Advisors and one of the advocates asked to review the policy as part of a rulemaking process. Plan could block many from loan relief More than 1 million Americans have had loans canceled through the program, including teachers, nurses, firefighters and others. Congress created the program in 2007 to encourage college graduates to work in the public sector. It promises to cancel all remaining debt after borrowers make 120 monthly loan payments while working for any level of government. Currently, nonprofits also are eligible if they focus on certain areas including public interest law, public health or education. A federal database of eligible employers currently includes some that provide grants to transgender youth and their families so they can travel to states that permit gender-affirming care for minors. It also includes some that provide legal services to immigrants regardless of their legal status. Trump ordered changes to the program in March, declaring it had 'misdirected tax dollars into activist organizations' that harm national security. He directed the Education Department to remove organizations tied to illegal activities, singling out those that work with immigrants or transgender youth or those that support terrorism — a label he often applies to pro-Palestinian activists. His plan has the potential to block huge numbers of student loan borrowers from cancellation. Those who work for an ineligible employer would no longer be able to make progress toward cancellation, effectively forcing them to find a new job or forgo loan relief. Hospitals, schools, and nonprofits could be at risk The proposal's definitions of illegal activity largely mirror those laid out by Trump. They include 'aiding or abetting" in the violation of federal immigration law, and supporting any group designated as a foreign terrorist organization. Also on the list are violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a law Trump officials have invoked to root out diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Also considered illegal is 'engaging in the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children in violation of Federal or State law.' It says that includes the use of hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty. It defines children as those under 19. It raises concerns that entire hospital systems could become ineligible if a single department provides certain care to transgender youth. Likewise, the federal government could potentially strip the benefit from entire cities that limit cooperation with federal immigration officials. 'I could see entire cities and entire civil structures being targeted," said Alyssa Dobson, financial aid director at Slippery Rock University and a member of the rulemaking panel. It could also give the administration another tool in its campaign against universities that run afoul of the president's politics, she said. 'This unfortunately may allow them to further chase the undesirable institutions, in their view,' she said. When determining if an employer should be deemed ineligible, the department's proposal would take into account court judgments and other legal findings. But it leaves room for at least some degree of subjectivity, giving the education secretary the authority to exclude organizations without proof of a conviction or settlement. Advocates see ambiguity in the definition of illegal activity If used widely, the policy could worsen shortages of doctors and nurses, said Emeka Oguh, CEO of PeopleJoy, a company that helps employers provide student loan relief. A member of the panel, he encouraged the department to use the power surgically, going after individual hospital divisions rather than systems as a whole. Oguh said department officials were unable to provide examples of organizations that might be found to be involved in illegal activities. When pressed for detail, officials said it would not be considered illegal for a hospital to treat an immigrant in the country illegally, he said. Less certain was how the department would handle teachers or schools teaching lessons considered DEI. 'There was a lot of ambiguity there,' Oguh said. Some others raised concerns with a provision that requires employers to certify they do not engage in illegal activities. Failure to certify could also render an organization ineligible, raising the risk that paperwork problems could jeopardize cancellation for huge numbers of borrowers. The department said it's open to making changes based on the panel's concerns. Ultimately, it's free to shape the proposal as it pleases. The agency is now preparing a formal proposal that will undergo a public comment period before it's finalized. It would be expected to take effect in July 2026. Last week, the Education Department thanked the experts and said they 'helped fulfill one of President Trump's promises to ensure that PSLF does not subsidize organizations that are breaking the law.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Independent
07-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Student loan cancellation program could become Trump retribution tool, some advocates fear
President Donald Trump is reshaping a student loan cancellation program into what some fear will become a tool for political retribution, taking aim at organizations that serve immigrants and transgender youth. The Education Department is preparing an overhaul of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program that would strip the benefit from organizations involved in 'illegal activities" and allow the U.S. education secretary to decide which should lose eligibility. A draft proposal released by the department includes definitions of illegal activity that center on immigration, terrorism and transgender issues. Several advocates invited to weigh in on the draft proposal raised concerns it would give the department subjective authority to decide if an organization is engaged in anything illegal — a power that could be used to remove entire hospital systems or state governments from the program. 'That's definitely an indicator for me that this is politically motivated and perhaps will be used as a tool for political punishment,' said Betsy Mayotte, president of the Institute of Student Loan Advisors and one of the advocates asked to review the policy as part of a rulemaking process. Plan could block many from loan relief More than 1 million Americans have had loans canceled through the program, including teachers, nurses, firefighters and others. Congress created the program in 2007 to encourage college graduates to work in the public sector. It promises to cancel all remaining debt after borrowers make 120 monthly loan payments while working for any level of government. Currently, nonprofits also are eligible if they focus on certain areas including public interest law, public health or education. A federal database of eligible employers currently includes some that provide grants to transgender youth and their families so they can travel to states that permit gender-affirming care for minors. It also includes some that provide legal services to immigrants regardless of their legal status. Trump ordered changes to the program in March, declaring it had 'misdirected tax dollars into activist organizations' that harm national security. He directed the Education Department to remove organizations tied to illegal activities, singling out those that work with immigrants or transgender youth or those that support terrorism — a label he often applies to pro-Palestinian activists. His plan has the potential to block huge numbers of student loan borrowers from cancellation. Those who work for an ineligible employer would no longer be able to make progress toward cancellation, effectively forcing them to find a new job or forgo loan relief. Hospitals, schools, and nonprofits could be at risk The proposal's definitions of illegal activity largely mirror those laid out by Trump. They include 'aiding or abetting" in the violation of federal immigration law, and supporting any group designated as a foreign terrorist organization. Also on the list are violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a law Trump officials have invoked to root out diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Also considered illegal is 'engaging in the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children in violation of Federal or State law.' It says that includes the use of hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty. It defines children as those under 19. It raises concerns that entire hospital systems could become ineligible if a single department provides certain care to transgender youth. Likewise, the federal government could potentially strip the benefit from entire cities that limit cooperation with federal immigration officials. 'I could see entire cities and entire civil structures being targeted," said Alyssa Dobson, financial aid director at Slippery Rock University and a member of the rulemaking panel. It could also give the administration another tool in its campaign against universities that run afoul of the president's politics, she said. 'This unfortunately may allow them to further chase the undesirable institutions, in their view,' she said. When determining if an employer should be deemed ineligible, the department's proposal would take into account court judgments and other legal findings. But it leaves room for at least some degree of subjectivity, giving the education secretary the authority to exclude organizations without proof of a conviction or settlement. Advocates see ambiguity in the definition of illegal activity If used widely, the policy could worsen shortages of doctors and nurses, said Emeka Oguh, CEO of PeopleJoy, a company that helps employers provide student loan relief. A member of the panel, he encouraged the department to use the power surgically, going after individual hospital divisions rather than systems as a whole. Oguh said department officials were unable to provide examples of organizations that might be found to be involved in illegal activities. When pressed for detail, officials said it would not be considered illegal for a hospital to treat an immigrant in the country illegally, he said. Less certain was how the department would handle teachers or schools teaching lessons considered DEI. 'There was a lot of ambiguity there,' Oguh said. Some others raised concerns with a provision that requires employers to certify they do not engage in illegal activities. Failure to certify could also render an organization ineligible, raising the risk that paperwork problems could jeopardize cancellation for huge numbers of borrowers. The department said it's open to making changes based on the panel's concerns. Ultimately, it's free to shape the proposal as it pleases. The agency is now preparing a formal proposal that will undergo a public comment period before it's finalized. It would be expected to take effect in July 2026. Last week, the Education Department thanked the experts and said they 'helped fulfill one of President Trump's promises to ensure that PSLF does not subsidize organizations that are breaking the law.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
