Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

bigtree

(93,116 posts)

19. smoke. No real prosecutor thought she should be charged.

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #15)

Wed Oct 29, 2025, 04:58 PM

Wednesday

...nothing claimed has been proven, and I notice that you provided somke here but no actual fire.

James purchased the home in Norfolk, Virginia, for her great-niece in 2020 for $137,000 in 2020 and immediately allowed her and her children to begin living in the house rent-free. Prosecutors met with James' niece, who stated that she had never signed a lease, had never paid rent for the home, and that James had often sent her money to cover some of the expenses, the memo concluded, according to sources familiar with its contents.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/evidence-appears-to-undercut-claims-against-james-prosecutors-found-sources/ar-AA1P3SM1

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

BeerBarrelPolka Emrys

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Three words in Letitia James' mortgage contract doom the fraud case against her [View all] bigtree Wednesday OP

The author is incorrect FBaggins Wednesday #1

I'm no lawyer, but other lawyers disagree with you. Happy Hoosier Wednesday #2

Exclusive use DOES NOT mean that occupancy FBaggins Wednesday #3

Where did you get your information? dpibel Wednesday #4

You provided a link to the document FBaggins Wednesday #5

For the first year dpibel Wednesday #6

Yes - and the story is that she purchased the home for her grand niece's use FBaggins Wednesday #8

Did you read the entire article? dpibel Wednesday #9

I did - none of them are commenting on the topic in the title/OP FBaggins Wednesday #17

Pretzels are tasty! dpibel Wednesday #18

I assume that's not an intentional strawman FBaggins Wednesday #20

Not sure why you're so invested in this dpibel Wednesday #22

I'm not so sure, either. marble falls Wednesday #26

it really sucks when you have to NJCher Wednesday #16

this is specious bigtree Wednesday #7

Rent isn't actually part of the charges FBaggins Wednesday #15

smoke. No real prosecutor thought she should be charged. bigtree Wednesday #19

That part is true. It's clearly a politically-motivated prosecution FBaggins Wednesday #21

they're not going to spend much time parsing whether she visited the home or stayed there bigtree Wednesday #25

When you sign a document attesting to exclusive use you don't list everyone who will be occupying the property Hassin Bin Sober Wednesday #23

Very nicely put. marble falls Wednesday #27

That's true - and would be a great defense if it were relevant FBaggins Wednesday #28

Dude. I'm part owner of a mortgage company. Hassin Bin Sober Wednesday #30

Not possible with a 2nd Home IbogaProject Wednesday #24

Dudnt her niece live there? viva la Wednesday #29

When I was young a female CPA told me the expression "picking the fly shit out of pepper". twodogsbarking Wednesday #10

Quite the discussion above, unless I missed it..... KS Toronado Wednesday #11

Question: Who is being defrauded here? SpankMe Wednesday #12

K&R UTUSN Wednesday #13

She would be better off popsdenver Wednesday #14