Trump targets enemies using mortgage records, a special threat in D.C.

President Donald Trump’s administration is using personal mortgage files to investigate, criminally refer and indict its enemies for fraud, zeroing in on people who appear to claim multiple homes as primary residences.
The tactic may pose a special threat in Washington, where dozens of lawmakers and other political figures also report holding mortgages on more than one home.
The underlying documents don’t always show information that differentiates paperwork mistakes from intentional deception. All three of the Trump adversaries who face investigations into alleged fraud – New York Attorney General Letitia James, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California) and Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook – have denied any wrongdoing. But they are under pressure: James was arraigned Friday in federal court in Norfolk, after being indicted by the Justice Department this month. Trump is still trying to remove Cook from the Fed board.
The kinds of files that Trump allies have used to promote their allegations could bring greater attention to powerful figures across the capital.
At least 41 members of the House – 29 Democrats and 12 Republicans – included multiple mortgages on their most recent annual financial disclosure reports, according to a Washington Post analysis of publicly available documents. At least 26 senators – 16 Republicans and 10 Democrats – disclosed multiple mortgages on their filings.
The Post’s analysis did not look at lawmakers’ specific mortgage documents, which can include details on whether properties would be used as primary houses, rentals or vacation spots. The Post’s review also does not reveal wrongdoing, since public records often don’t include key information about borrowers’ intentions or their correspondence with lenders getting everyone on the same page.
Yet the findings underscore the unusual nature of using the documents as basis for fraud.
Kathleen Engel, who focuses on mortgage regulation at Suffolk University, said the fact that many powerful people hold multiple mortgages raises questions on how Trump “picks and chooses people who he will target, and people who he will bless.”
Prominent officials directly involved with the administration’s fraud probes also show multiple mortgages in public records.
In June 2020, Todd Blanche – the deputy attorney general, to whom housing officials sent James’s criminal referral – took out a 30-year, $141,550 mortgage on a Maryland home with his son. The next month, Blanche also modified a more than $400,000 loan on his house in New York. Based on available documents, neither of the homes were specified as second homes or other kinds of properties.
That would appear to make the documents similar to those the White House has used against its adversaries. But administration officials say Blanche’s public records omit crucial context.
In a statement, Justice Department spokeswoman Natalie Baldassarre said Blanche “had one mortgage for his only residence before the home was sold. As do many parents, Mr. Blanche additionally co-signed his son’s mortgage to assist him in the purchase of his own home, something that was disclosed at the time the mortgage was secured and to the Senate earlier this year. This reporting is irresponsible journalism in an apparent effort to embarrass and get clicks.”
Multiple investigations have been spurred by Bill Pulte, head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Pulte has made mortgage fraud a centerpiece of his role, telling Bloomberg Television in August that “if it’s a Republican who is committing mortgage fraud, we’re going to look at it. If it’s a Democrat, we’re going to look at it. If it’s a wealthy politician or a lawyer, we’re going to look at it.”
When asked about the prevalence of multiple mortgages among members of Congress, FHFA spokesman Tallman Johnson said in a statement that “if the Washington Post possesses evidence of mortgage fraud, we urge the Post to promptly share the fraud with the authorities, rather than withholding it for entertainment purposes.”
The White House did not respond to request for comment.
Prominent Democrats have accused Pulte of abusing his role with the mortgage fraud probes and of focusing attention on Trump’s enemies, particularly while several prominent Republicans have also listed multiple homes as primary residences. Reporting from ProPublica showed at least three of Trump’s Cabinet members call multiple homes their primary residences on mortgages.
Washington’s elite may be more likely to have multiple homes than others, experts say. Cabinet members or political appointees may only reside in the capital for a few years at a time. Lawmakers routinely fly to and from their home districts.
Schiff, for example, sent a letter to Quicken Loans, the lender on his Maryland home, confirming that California was his principal legal residence and that he paid taxes in the state, The Post previously reported. In that letter, Schiff also noted that he had been told by Quicken’s lawyers and the House Administration Committee that because his family lived in Maryland for most of the year, his house there could also be considered a primary residence for insurance underwriting purposes.
Patricia McCoy, an expert on financial regulation at Boston College Law School, said Washington’s unique obligations may make someone more likely to take out a loan.
“Federal salaries are attractive, but you don’t get rich on a federal salary,” McCoy said. “If a person isn’t independently wealthy, then they’re going to be under some financial pressure.”
Beyond Washington, an estimated 1.18 million second homes nationally were purchased with a mortgage from 2018 to 2023, according to research from the Pew Charitable Trusts analyzing Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data. Second-home purchases peaked at 261,000 in 2021 but have since declined to 88,000 in 2024.
Still, the properties owned by regulators, lawmakers and other power brokers in Washington may draw disproportionate scrutiny. Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, acting vice president of policy and government affairs at the Project on Government Oversight, said public documents are being deployed as “additional pressure points that can be used to mess with people.”
“It’s in the same general ballpark of taking information about people that exists for a legitimate purpose,” Hedtler-Gaudette said, “and then trying to abuse and misuse it.”