Gothamist77%

Trump-backed investigations into NY AG Letitia James cost taxpayers $1.4M and counting 54%

By Jimmy Vielkind0%

5/10/2026, 12:01:06 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Negativity Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 24.8% saturation with 203 hits. Analysis detected 1,717 faulty-reasoning hits from 818 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.2% and a BS Rank of 54% (10,170 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.50% of the article peer group.

Lobbyists, major labor unions, a co-owner of the Flatiron Building and Bronx District Attorney Darcel Clark all contributed to Attorney General Letitia James’ legal defense as she fended off an investigation from President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice. 
Documents filed by the Democratic Attorneys General Association show that the national advocacy group spent around $625,000 to defend James from allegations by federal prosecutors in Virginia that she committed mortgage fraud in that state. 
A federal judge subsequently dismissed the case. 
Federal prosecutors are reportedly still investigating James in connection with her properties. 
Taxpayers, meanwhile, have spent $1.4 million and counting to beat back another investigation by federal prosecutors in Albany, state records show. 
That tab is expected to rise as the case is appealed. 
That investigation, according to court filings, is examining James’ handling of a case centering on the Trump Organization’s valuation of properties, as well as another into the National Rifle Association. 
On Monday, a former U.S. solicitor general argued that John Sarcone, Trump’s pick to lead the U.S. attorney’s office covering much of upstate New York, should remain barred from continuing the parallel investigation of James. 
James and her allies say the charges and investigations are political. 
Her office prevailed in the Trump Organization case, prompting the Republican president to publicly pressure DOJ leaders to go after James. 
That sense of unfairness motivated donors to her legal defense, they said. 
“It was a national outrage that the Trump administration would just be so hell-bent on going after our attorney general,” said state Sen. 
John Liu, a Queens Democrat who donated $200. 
“We didn't want Attorney General James to feel like  she didn't have everyone in backing her.” 
Emily Trifone, a spokesperson for the Democratic Attorneys General Association, said the organization raised more than $1 million for the legal defense fund. 
Trifone said it’s difficult to determine exactly who donated to James’ legal defense because all contributions go into the organization’s general fund. 
Liu said he contributed after a Zoom call organized by the advocacy group 100 Black Men. 
Jeff Gural, a real estate developer and co-owner of Manhattan’s historic Flatiron Building, contributed $5,000 to the Democratic Attorneys General Association. 
He confirmed his donation was aimed at James’ defense. 
U.S. 
Attorney John Sarcone launched an investigation into James' investigations of the NRA and Trump Organization. 
Other prominent figures donated to the association in the days after James’ indictment. 
Clark, the top prosecutor in the Bronx, gave $500. 
Valerie Berlin, a cofounder of the lobbying and public relations firm BerlinRosen, contributed $1,000. 
Lobbyist Emily Giske donated $3,000. 
A political action committee associated with SEIU 1199, a union representing healthcare workers, contributed $50,000 on October 9  the same day James was charged with mortgage fraud. 
A union spokesperson said the donation was made to “protect our democratic institutions.” 
Local 1180 of the Communication Workers of America, which represents New York City employees, contributed $3,000. 
A spokesperson didn’t return requests for comment. 
Fearing that Trump would seek retribution against his perceived enemies, New York lawmakers created a special $10 million fund for James and others to use for legal defense. 
James’ office opted not to tap it, saying it wanted to save taxpayer funds, and instead turned to the Democratic Attorneys General Association. 
The organization said it set up the legal defense fund to help any state prosecutors who ended up in Trump’s crosshairs. 
It’s still seeking contributions. 
"As Democratic AGs continue to be on the front lines fighting to protect the rights and freedoms of all Americans, President Trump continues to ignore the law and target anyone who disagrees with him,” Trifone said. 
“DAGA will always defend all Democratic AGs and their staff who are targeted for political retribution by the Trump administration." 
The federal investigation of James’ office stalled after Sarcone issued subpoenas for records from her cases against the Trump Organization and the NRA. 
James’ office hired an outside law firm, Munger Tolles & Olson LLP, to challenge the subpoenas. 
Taxpayers are footing the bill because the subpoenas targeted the Office of Attorney General. 
A federal judge quashed them, finding that Sarcone was not properly appointed to his position and couldn’t lawfully sign off on the subpoenas. 
A panel of appellate judges heard arguments over the matter on Monday. 
James’ office was represented by Donald Verrilli, a former U.S. solicitor general. 
Under the retainer agreement, partners like Verrilli bill for $1,650 per hour. 
The state has paid the firm $1.4 million as of late March, spending records show. 
James’ office increased its overall contract with the firm to $2.5 million in February, according to the state comptroller’s office. 
“Our office continues to defend its work in the Trump Organization and NRA cases against the federal government’s attack on the rule of law,” said Alexis Richards, a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 2.7%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias10.6%This article: 5.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias5.7%This article: 9.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.7%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic9.4%This article: 6.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 3.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.8%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.5%Jimmy Vielkind: 9.9%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect12.5%This article: 2.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion2.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.6%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.1%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias4.8%This article: 16.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 6.7%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias16.3%This article: 2.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.6%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias2.8%This article: 2.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error2.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.6%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias7.8%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.5%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.5%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect2.4%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias3.4%This article: 1.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect1.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.6%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority9.7%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.7%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 1.5%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning1.5%This article: 7.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.3%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization7.0%This article: 3.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring3.7%This article: 1.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon1.6%This article: 24.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 7.3%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion24.8%This article: 4.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.6%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question4.8%This article: 10.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.0%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 17.1%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)17.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading2.4%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 7.2%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection7.2%This article: 15.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.1%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice15.4%This article: 6.8%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.3%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination6.8%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 2.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

818 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers23%attributed speech633writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Liu • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Liu • 17 words • 0.0% coverageEmily Trifone • 23 words • 0.0% coverageEmily Trifone • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Liu • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Gural • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageEmily Trifone • 36 words • 100.0% coverageEmily Trifone • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageAlexis Richards • 34 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Alexis Richards

100%flagged-word coverage
34 attributed words18% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+85.5 ptsWriter: 14.5%Alexis Richards: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Alexis Richards: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.