Red Right Daily

Truth in Freedom

Letitia James Indicted

Letitia James Indicted

It’s a moment almost too rich in irony to script: Letitia James, the New York Attorney General who launched her political ascent by pledging to “get Trump,” now finds herself under indictment for bank fraud. The very woman who built her public image on the relentless pursuit of one man—before a single charge had ever been filed—is now facing the same legal scrutiny she once wielded with unchecked ambition.

For years, James has wrapped herself in the language of righteousness: justice, accountability, the rule of law. She was a media darling, portrayed as a crusader against corruption. But as RedState reported, what goes around has indeed come back around, and this time, it’s James standing in front of a grand jury—not Trump.


The details are especially damning. The supervisor at the DOJ’s Norfolk office initially refused to file charges, citing a lack of probable cause. But that didn’t stop the case from progressing. Eventually, it reached a grand jury—the same legal mechanism so often invoked to justify charges against conservatives—and they found probable cause to indict. That development, in and of itself, represents a massive crack in the narrative long upheld by James and her allies.

Reactions have been as revealing as the indictment itself. On MSNBC, Nicolle Wallace looked visibly shaken. Andrew Weissmann, the architect of many legal offensives against Trump, offered a reaction that bordered on disbelief. These are individuals who, for years, assured Americans that their partisan prosecutions were noble, necessary, and morally unassailable. Now, confronted with the reality that the weaponized legal standards they embraced are being applied across the board, they can’t seem to handle the consequences.


Letitia James’ past statements haven’t aged well. Her tweets, speeches, and public proclamations are now being replayed with brutal clarity—and the effect is devastating. “No one is above the law” was once her rallying cry. It may now be her epitaph in public office.

And let’s be clear: this is not about retribution, nor is it about some kind of shallow political “payback.” It’s about consistency. If the legal system is going to be used as a political tool—as it was in the case against Trump—then it must be wielded impartially. If financial misstatements and questionable accounting practices were grounds for a full-blown legal war against a sitting president, they must be equally valid when applied to an elected Democrat with her own skeletons.

Written by Mark Stevens - October 10, 2025