Overview
In early 2025, President Donald Trump installed housing heir and online philanthropist Bill Pulte as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the regulator overseeing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and more than $8.5 trillion in U.S. mortgage credit. Within months, Pulte began using access to mortgage data and his new authority to publicly accuse several high-profile Democrats — New York Attorney General Letitia James, Senator Adam Schiff, Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and Congressman Eric Swalwell — of mortgage fraud, and to refer them to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.
These tactics prompted growing concern that FHFA, a traditionally technocratic financial regulator, was being repurposed into a tool for political retribution. Senate Democrats pressed Pulte for records, warned of potential privacy and abuse-of-power violations, and on November 17, 2025 formally asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate whether he misused federal authority and resources for partisan ends. On December 4, GAO confirmed it had opened a probe into Pulte’s conduct, including his bypassing of the FHFA inspector general and creation of parallel fraud pipelines. This story arc therefore extends beyond narrow congressional oversight to a broader question: whether a little-known housing regulator has been transformed into a political weapon — and what checks, if any, can force a course correction.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
FHFA is the U.S. regulator and conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the regulator of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, responsible for the safety and soundness of entities that fund more than $8.5 trillion in U.S. mortgage markets.
GAO is Congress’ nonpartisan watchdog, tasked with auditing federal programs, evaluating agency performance and investigating potential misuse of public funds or authority.
Fannie Mae is a government‑sponsored enterprise (GSE) that buys and guarantees mortgages, operating under FHFA conservatorship since 2008. Its internal fraud and quality‑control units produced memoranda later cited in political attacks.
Freddie Mac is a GSE that purchases and guarantees mortgages, operating under FHFA conservatorship and subject to the same oversight dynamics as Fannie Mae.
Timeline
-
Detroit Free Press Highlights GAO Probe into Pulte
Media CoverageThe Detroit Free Press reports that the congressional watchdog’s investigation into FHFA Director Bill Pulte will examine whether he abused his position and misused government resources, adding hometown and political context to the growing national scrutiny of his conduct.
-
Grand Jury Declines to Re‑Indict Letitia James
Legal Turning PointA federal grand jury in Virginia refuses DOJ’s attempt to re‑indict New York AG Letitia James on revised mortgage‑fraud charges after a judge dismissed the original case over an unlawfully appointed prosecutor. The rare move intensifies criticism that the prosecution, triggered by Pulte’s referral, is weak and politically motivated.
-
GAO Opens Investigation Into FHFA Director Bill Pulte
InvestigationGAO notifies Senate Democrats that it will investigate whether FHFA Director Bill Pulte and his staff abused their power by using agency resources and mortgage data to target Trump’s political adversaries, including James, Schiff, Cook and Swalwell. GAO says it will coordinate with FHFA’s acting inspector general and has not set a timeline.
-
Warren and Senate Democrats Ask GAO to Investigate Pulte
Oversight RequestSenator Elizabeth Warren and seven other Democrats formally request that GAO investigate whether Pulte and FHFA staff misused federal authority and resources, violated privacy laws, or changed mortgage‑fraud standards to facilitate partisan targeting of Trump’s opponents.
-
Senate Democrats Accuse Pulte of Abusing FHFA Power
Congressional OversightSix Senate Democrats send Pulte a letter accusing him of abusing his authority as FHFA director to attack Trump’s perceived adversaries, highlighting his focus on James, Schiff and Cook while declining to scrutinize comparable allegations involving Republican officials and Trump cabinet members. They demand documents on his investigations and internal processes.
-
Pulte Rejects 'Political Weaponization' Label on CNBC
Public StatementIn a combative CNBC interview, Pulte repeatedly declines to explain where he got the 'tip' underlying his accusations against Lisa Cook, saying he will not discuss 'sources and methods.' Pressed about perceptions that his actions are politically driven, he insists he is simply enforcing mortgage rules.
-
LA Times Exposes Pulte’s Broader Campaign Against Trump Foes
Investigative ReportingThe Los Angeles Times publishes a detailed profile describing Pulte, a Trump donor turned regulator, as leading an unprecedented effort to mine mortgage records for possible missteps by Letitia James, Adam Schiff, Lisa Cook and Eric Swalwell, while ignoring similar issues involving Trump cabinet members and even Pulte’s own relatives.
-
Pulte Targets Fed Governor Lisa Cook With Fraud Referral
Legal ActionPulte alleges that Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook claimed two different homes as primary residences in 2021 and misused a second‑home designation on a third property, and says he has submitted a criminal referral to DOJ. Trump responds by demanding her resignation and later attempts to fire her 'for cause'; Cook refuses to step down and insists she did nothing wrong.
-
Trump Publicly Accuses Senator Adam Schiff of Mortgage Fraud
Public StatementCiting an internal Fannie Mae memo transmitted to Pulte, Trump accuses Senator Adam Schiff of mortgage fraud for allegedly misrepresenting his primary residence between homes in Maryland and California. Schiff rejects the claims as political retaliation and notes that the Fannie memo did not actually conclude he committed fraud.
-
Pulte Refers New York AG Letitia James for Mortgage-Fraud Prosecution
Legal ActionPulte sends a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi alleging that New York AG Letitia James misrepresented an investment property as her primary residence, misstated unit counts and mischaracterized a familial relationship on loan documents, and urges DOJ to investigate her for mortgage and bank fraud. James calls the allegations retaliation for her work against Trump.
-
Pulte Sworn In, Vows a 'Golden Age' of Housing
Public StatementAt agency headquarters, Pulte is sworn in as the fifth FHFA director. In prepared remarks, he promises a 'Golden Age of housing and mortgage accessibility' and pledges to keep markets 'safe and sound' while expanding homeownership.
-
Senate Confirms Pulte as FHFA Director
ConfirmationThe U.S. Senate votes 56–43 to confirm William Pulte as FHFA director for a five‑year term. Industry associations congratulate him and emphasize his role in addressing housing affordability and charting a path out of GSE conservatorship.
-
Trump Nominates Bill Pulte to Lead FHFA
AppointmentPresident‑elect Donald Trump announces Bill Pulte as his pick to direct the Federal Housing Finance Agency, drawing praise from homebuilder and mortgage‑industry groups that expect him to focus on ending Fannie and Freddie’s conservatorships and boosting housing supply.
Scenarios
GAO Finds Serious Abuse; Pulte Is Forced Out or Sharply Curbed
Discussed by: Senate Democrats, legal commentators, watchdog groups, and some financial‑regulation analysts
Under this scenario, GAO concludes that Pulte systematically misused FHFA resources and confidential mortgage data to target political opponents, bypassing the inspector general and violating internal controls or privacy protections. Such findings could fuel calls for his resignation, bipartisan pressure on Trump to fire him, or even impeachment‑style proceedings for an agency head. Congress might push statutory changes to clarify that FHFA cannot conduct politically sensitive criminal referrals without IG involvement, and to reinforce privacy and data‑access safeguards. The outcome would resemble prior cases where intensive oversight, even without criminal charges, led to leadership changes and institutional reforms.
GAO Criticizes Processes but Pulte Survives, Norms Erode
Discussed by: Some nonpartisan think tanks, former regulators quoted in major outlets, and political handicappers
GAO could issue a nuanced report faulting FHFA for weak governance, unclear lines between supervisory work and prosecutions, or poor documentation, while stopping short of declaring Pulte’s actions unlawful or overtly partisan. The White House would likely claim vindication and keep him in place, perhaps with cosmetic policy tweaks or new guidelines for interactions with DOJ. This would normalize a more overtly political role for FHFA and other regulators, signaling that aggressive use of confidential financial data against opponents is tolerable so long as it is legally colorable, even if highly selective.
Backlash Spurs Broader Anti‑Weaponization Reforms
Discussed by: Good‑government organizations, some centrist lawmakers, and editorial boards drawing parallels to past politicization scandals
GAO’s probe, combined with controversies over DOJ’s handling of the James and Schiff cases, could catalyze a broader legislative response. Congress might bolster inspectors general, codify rules for when regulators can make criminal referrals, or limit how agencies share sensitive financial data about elected officials. Reforms could mirror post‑Watergate and post‑IRS‑targeting changes, creating clearer guardrails against using tax, housing‑finance or banking powers as political cudgels. Even if Pulte remains in office, his tenure could become a case study that drives stronger separation between technical regulators and partisan fights.
Investigations Stall or Fizzle, Pulte’s Narrative Gains Traction
Discussed by: Pro‑Trump media, some administration allies, and skeptical commentators about congressional investigations
It is possible that GAO’s work drags on without clear conclusions, DOJ declines to charge anyone over alleged abuses inside FHFA, and courts uphold Trump’s contested moves against targets like Lisa Cook. Pulte and his allies would argue that the absence of criminal findings proves his campaign was a legitimate anti‑fraud effort and that critics engaged in a partisan smear. That outcome would embolden similar efforts to use regulatory data against opponents in the future, and reinforce perceptions among Trump supporters that watchdogs are themselves politicized.
Historical Context
Nixon’s 'Enemies List' and Use of Federal Agencies
1971–1974What Happened
During Richard Nixon’s presidency, White House aides compiled an 'enemies list' of political opponents and discussed using federal machinery — particularly the IRS and other investigative tools — to 'screw' those adversaries. Memos and later testimony revealed efforts to trigger tax audits and other forms of harassment, which became part of the broader Watergate narrative about abuse of presidential power.
Outcome
Short term: The revelations contributed to congressional investigations, public outrage and a perception that the administration had turned ostensibly neutral agencies into political weapons.
Long term: Post‑Watergate reforms strengthened oversight of intelligence and law‑enforcement agencies and reinforced norms against using the IRS or other regulators for partisan retaliation, though later controversies show those norms remain vulnerable.
Why It's Relevant
The Pulte saga echoes Nixon‑era concerns about using obscure bureaucratic levers — in this case FHFA and mortgage data — to target named political enemies. How aggressively Congress and watchdogs respond will test whether post‑Watergate safeguards still deter such behavior or whether new tools are needed for the age of data‑rich financial regulators.
2013 IRS Targeting Scandal (Lois Lerner)
2010–2015What Happened
In the early 2010s, the IRS’s Exempt Organizations division used politically loaded search terms, including 'Tea Party' and 'Patriot,' to flag certain nonprofit applicants for extra scrutiny. In 2013, division head Lois Lerner acknowledged the conduct and apologized. The Treasury inspector general and congressional investigators found that conservative groups were systematically singled out, leading to hearings, Lerner’s resignation and a formal IRS apology as part of a court settlement.
Outcome
Short term: The scandal triggered multiple investigations, a leadership shake‑up at the IRS, and intense partisan conflict over whether the Obama administration had weaponized tax enforcement.
Long term: While no senior officials were criminally convicted, the episode damaged trust in the IRS and spurred procedural changes and heightened sensitivity to using enforcement filters that correlate with ideology. It remains a touchstone in debates over 'weaponization' of the administrative state.
Why It's Relevant
Pulte’s FHFA campaign similarly raises questions about whether a technical agency, armed with privileged financial data, is being directed to focus on one political faction. The IRS case shows that even without criminal findings, perceived selective enforcement can have enduring political costs and prompt structural reforms.
2006 Dismissal of U.S. Attorneys for Political Reasons
2006–2010What Happened
In 2006, the George W. Bush administration abruptly dismissed several U.S. attorneys mid‑term. Subsequent investigations found that political considerations — including pressure to pursue voter‑fraud and public‑corruption cases aligned with Republican priorities — had influenced the firings. A Justice Department inspector general report later described the process as 'arbitrary' and 'fundamentally flawed,' raising doubts about the integrity of prosecution decisions.
Outcome
Short term: The scandal led to intense congressional scrutiny, the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and reputational damage to DOJ, though prosecutors ultimately declined to bring criminal charges over the firings.
Long term: The episode reinforced norms against overtly partisan manipulation of prosecutorial appointments but also highlighted the limits of legal remedies when political actors exploit structural discretion for partisan ends.
Why It's Relevant
Pulte’s alleged bypassing of the FHFA inspector general and orchestration of politically sensitive referrals to DOJ resembles earlier attempts to bend prosecutorial mechanisms toward partisan aims. The U.S. attorney firings case suggests GAO and IG reports can force leadership changes and reforms even absent criminal convictions, but may not fully deter future attempts at politicization.