Former President Donald Trump is once again taking aim at one of his fiercest political rivals — California Senator Adam Schiff. This time, the accusation isn’t about politics directly but about something that hits closer to home: mortgage fraud. Trump claims that Schiff misled lenders about which of his two homes was his “primary residence,” allegedly to score better loan terms.

The accusation has sparked a media firestorm, but the story is far from straightforward. Different news outlets are covering the issue in very different ways. To get a clear picture, we’ll break down what’s been reported, what the actual evidence shows, and what remains unclear.

What Exactly Is Trump Accusing Schiff Of?

Trump claims that Schiff falsely listed his Maryland home as his “primary residence” on mortgage documents while simultaneously claiming his California condo as his primary residence for tax purposes. Why does this matter?

  • Primary residences usually get better loan terms. Banks often give lower interest rates for your main home compared to second homes or investment properties.
  • Claiming a primary residence for taxes can save money too. In California, for example, homeowners can get a small tax break — about $70 a year in Schiff’s case — if the property is designated as their primary home.

In Trump’s words, Schiff “got a cheaper mortgage and ripped off America.” Trump also says Fannie Mae, a government-sponsored mortgage company, found “conclusive evidence” of wrongdoing.

What We Know About Schiff’s Homes

Schiff owns two properties:

  1. Potomac, Maryland: A two-story house he bought in 2003 to live near Washington, D.C., while serving in Congress.
  2. Burbank, California: A condo he purchased in 2009 in his home district.

Like many members of Congress who live far from Washington, Schiff splits his time between his district and the capital. According to his spokesperson, both homes were always disclosed, and both were used year-round — meaning neither was a vacation property.

What Does the Fannie Mae Memo Say?

This is where the reporting differs depending on the outlet.

  • The Los Angeles Times (Left-Leaning)
    The LA Times reviewed a memo from Fannie Mae investigators and reported that while the memo mentioned “possible occupancy misrepresentation” from 2009 to 2020, it did not accuse Schiff of fraud or say a crime had been committed.
  • Fox News (Right-Leaning)
    Fox News reported that William Pulte, the Trump-appointed head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), sent a criminal referral to the Department of Justice. The referral claims Schiff falsified bank documents and property records to get better rates from 2003 to 2019.
  • HousingWire (Centrist)
    HousingWire, a mortgage industry news outlet, quoted Trump’s statement about “conclusive evidence” but pointed out that the FHFA declined to comment, leaving the claim unverified.

The bottom line: The memo confirms there were inconsistencies in how Schiff listed his properties, but whether those inconsistencies amount to “fraud” remains unsettled.

Schiff’s Response

Schiff has called the accusations “baseless” and a clear case of political payback from Trump.

“This is just Donald Trump’s latest attempt at political retaliation against his perceived enemies. So it is not a surprise, only how weak this false allegation turns out to be,” Schiff wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

His spokesperson explained that:

  • All lenders involved in his mortgages were fully aware that he owned both homes.
  • He purchased the Maryland home so he could live near his children and congressional duties in Washington, and maintained the Burbank condo as his California residence.
  • Neither property was a rental or vacation home, and his mortgage arrangements followed both legal and ethical standards.

Could Schiff Actually Go to Jail?

While Trump is pushing the narrative of fraud, legal experts say the odds of Schiff facing charges are low.

Here’s why:

  • Statute of limitations: Most federal fraud charges have a 10-year time limit. If the last allegedly false statement was in 2013, as some reports suggest, that time window may have already closed.
  • Proof of intent: For a fraud conviction, prosecutors would need to prove Schiff intentionally misled lenders. If lenders knew he lived in both homes, as Schiff claims, that would be hard to prove.
  • Political climate: Any trial would likely take place in liberal-leaning areas like Maryland, California, or Washington, D.C., making a conviction even less likely unless there was overwhelming evidence.

Even Fox News, which is more critical of Schiff, admitted that a federal prosecution is unlikely unless a clear, intentional falsehood is proven.

The Bigger Political Picture

The mortgage accusation is not happening in a vacuum. Schiff has been a thorn in Trump’s side for years, from leading Trump’s first impeachment inquiry to criticizing him over the January 6 Capitol riot. Trump, in turn, has called Schiff “a scam artist” and “one of the sleaziest politicians in history.”

The LA Times argues that Trump’s latest accusations are less about mortgages and more about political retaliation — especially as Trump faces his own legal troubles, including a $355 million civil fraud penalty in New York for inflating property values to secure loans.

Meanwhile, HousingWire notes that this is not the first time mortgage fraud accusations have been weaponized politically. Similar claims were recently made against New York Attorney General Letitia James, who famously sued Trump and won the fraud case against him.

What Are the Facts We Can Confirm?

Based on all three reports, here’s what we know for certain:

  • Schiff owns two properties: one in Maryland and one in California.
  • He has, at times, designated both as “primary residences” — Maryland for mortgage paperwork, California for a small homeowner’s tax break.
  • Fannie Mae did review his loan files and found inconsistencies.
  • The memo reviewed by LA Times did not conclude fraud or criminal intent.

What we don’t know is whether the FHFA’s referral (as reported by Fox News) will lead to further investigation or if it’s more of a political statement than a legal action.

Why This Story Matters

For the average homeowner, this story raises a simple question: Would I get away with something like this?

If a regular person tried to claim two primary residences to save money on taxes or loans, they might face penalties or even criminal charges. That’s why accusations like these get attention — they tap into the belief that politicians play by a different set of rules.

However, this case is not clear-cut. Schiff’s situation is unusual because members of Congress often have homes both in Washington, D.C., and their home states. The law isn’t always black and white when it comes to defining a “primary” residence, especially when both homes are used year-round.

The Media Divide

Looking at the coverage side-by-side, the differences are striking:

  • The LA Times frames this as a political attack and emphasizes the lack of hard evidence.
  • Fox News highlights the criminal angle but admits prosecution is unlikely.
  • HousingWire sticks to the basics of what Trump and Schiff have said, focusing less on the political drama.

These differences show how the same set of facts can be presented in very different ways depending on the outlet’s audience and perspective.

Were It Stands Now

At this point, the allegations against Adam Schiff remain just that — allegations. The evidence shows inconsistencies in how Schiff labeled his homes, but nothing yet proves that he broke the law. While Trump’s accusations have dominated headlines, it’s unclear whether this story will lead to any legal consequences or if it will remain another political flashpoint between two longtime rivals.

For now, the most important thing to watch is whether federal or state investigators take any formal action. Until then, the debate will likely stay in the political arena rather than the courtroom.

Posted in blog