Prosecutor claims New York AG’s office told him to target Trump allies for criminal investigation

A former prosecutor has accused New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office of directing him to search for crimes by Donald Trump’s associates, sparking a wave of criticism and denials from state officials and political rivals.

Daniel Wiesenfeld, who worked in the New York attorney general’s Investor Protection Bureau, alleged in an email sent to about 2,000 staffers that he was instructed to “find and pursue crimes” committed by Trump, his businesses, and others connected to the former president. Wiesenfeld’s message named specific targets, including Trump himself, Truth Social, and Hewlett Packard, and charged that these investigations lacked any “credible reason for targeting the organizations and individuals.”

Wiesenfeld’s email, which surfaced Friday, called on his colleagues not to “serve as Tish’s personal attorneys by targeting her political enemies,” referring to Attorney General James by her nickname. He wrote, “If you believe Trump is using the [Department of Justice] attorneys to prosecute his enemies and further his political interests, you should find it equally troubling that Tish [James] is doing exactly the same thing.” Wiesenfeld urged staffers to focus instead on “rampant nonprofit homeless shelter fraud and antisemitic crimes in and around synagogues,” and accused James of wasting “significant public taxpayer dollars to target convenient public enemies.”

Shortly after the email was sent, Wiesenfeld was placed on paid administrative leave. The attorney general’s office strongly rejected his claims, issuing a statement: “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 controversy arrives as James continues to face scrutiny over her conduct and priorities, echoing recent calls for her office to address public concerns in other high-profile New York disputes, such as demands for an investigation into the city’s subway fare system and her headline-making legal battles with Trump.

Allegations of political targeting roil attorney general’s office

Wiesenfeld’s accusations center on what he described as an effort to deploy the office’s resources against Trump’s allies for political reasons. In his email, he warned, “I hope you choose to prosecute crimes and find the individuals accountable, rather than targeting individuals and then finding crimes.” He also alleged that Shamiso Maswoswe, chief of the Investor Protection Bureau, specifically directed him to investigate Trump, Truth Social, and Hewlett Packard, even after the Department of Justice had approved a $14 billion merger involving Hewlett Packard and Juniper Networks.

The attorney general’s office did not respond to the specifics of Wiesenfeld’s allegations about Maswoswe, but insisted its work is impartial. The fallout from the email comes as the office continues to be the focus of partisan clashes, reminiscent of other recent power struggles in New York’s political establishment, such as the Brooklyn Democratic chair’s rule changes after a primary defeat.

Republican leaders and former Cuomo aide escalate criticism

New York State Republican Chairman Ed Cox seized on Wiesenfeld’s claims as evidence that James has “weaponized the attorney general’s office into a political hit squad.” He declared, “She is utterly unfit to serve,” and called for an attorney general “who prosecutes criminals, preserves public records and enforces the law without fear or favor.”

Nicole Kiprilov, spokesperson for Republican attorney general candidate Saritha Komatireddy, said the allegations prove the need for new leadership: “When Saritha is attorney general, she will instruct her attorneys to lock up repeat offenders, build residential treatment for the homeless, and root out fraud, not target people because of their politics.” She added, “It’s good to see that even the rank-and-file in the AG’s office agree that this is the right way forward. Let’s work together, across partisan lines, and create a safer, more affordable New York.”

Melissa DeRosa, former top aide to Governor Andrew Cuomo, echoed the criticisms on X (formerly Twitter), posting that “@TishJames has been abusing her office for political gain for years” and warning, “Don’t criticize Trump’s use of DOJ if you’re not going to call out hers, it’s wrong when either side does it.”

AG’s office faces pattern of scrutiny and questions about priorities

This is hardly the first time Attorney General James’ actions have drawn accusations of political motivation. Her 2018 campaign included a pledge to “prosecute the president for crimes committed in New York state” if elected, a vow that set the tone for her ongoing legal battles with Trump. In 2024, her office won a $360 million civil case against Trump, his sons, and his former company, a verdict that was later upheld on appeal, though without the massive financial payout originally sought.

Some critics argue these high-profile prosecutions come at the expense of addressing more pressing local issues, a theme reflected in recent disputes over city programs and spending, such as concerns about taxpayer funding for city-owned grocery stores. The pattern of using prosecutorial power in high-visibility cases has drawn parallels to national debates, including the handling of Justice Department leak investigations and election-law challenges, as seen in recent DOJ leak probe controversies and federal court rulings on voting laws.

Unanswered questions and calls for accountability

Wiesenfeld’s allegations have not been independently corroborated, and the full text of his email, as well as the specific evidence for his claims, remain unavailable. The attorney general’s office has not provided details about what led to Wiesenfeld being placed on administrative leave or the internal handling of his accusations. Open questions linger about the decision-making process and whether similar directives have been given in other politically sensitive cases.

For many New Yorkers, these developments reinforce concerns over the impartiality and priorities of their top law enforcement office. In a state where public confidence in institutions is already strained, voters are left asking whether the law is being used to serve justice, or to settle political scores. The public deserves real answers, not more insider maneuvering behind closed doors.

When prosecutors are told to hunt for crimes by political opponents, the rule of law takes a back seat to raw power, and that’s a risk no honest citizen should accept.