A fired New York prosecutor says Attorney General Letitia James is threatening professional and legal punishment after he refused to destroy materials he calls evidence of political targeting against President Trump.
Daniel Wiesenfeld, once a prosecutor in the attorney general’s Investor Protection Bureau, told the New York Post he will not delete or hand over what he describes as proof of misconduct inside the office. In a Monday email, he said James’s side had already sent letters warning of “professional discipline, as well as civil and/or criminal action,” and set a hard deadline for him to confirm the destruction of “confidential and/or privileged information.”
He also said detectives from the attorney general’s Executive Protection Detail had repeatedly banged on his front door and left a business card jammed in it after the latest visit. Wiesenfeld attached a photo of that card to the email and sent the message to general counsel Kumiki Gibson as well.
The dispute lands squarely on the long-running clash between James and Trump. Wiesenfeld’s account, if true, would show a state law office using its power not just to investigate but to pressure a former insider into erasing the paper trail.
Wiesenfeld’s Monday email laid out the sequence in plain terms. He cited a September 18 letter that threatened professional discipline and possible civil or criminal action. He then cited a September 30 letter that gave him until 5 p.m. that Monday to confirm he had destroyed the materials.
He answered with a hard no.
"I am in receipt of your September 18th letter threatening me with ‘professional discipline, as well as civil and/or criminal action’ and your subsequent September 30th letter providing a deadline by 5pm today for me to confirm my destruction of your ‘confidential and/or privileged information’,"
He continued:
"You have also commissioned your ‘protection detail’ detectives to repeatedly hound me by banging on my front door. Attached is the business card one of them left in my door after their latest intrusion,"
And he drew the line:
"These documents are simply evidence and your threats will not compel me to destroy such evidence. If anything, carrying out your threats by bringing this to a legal forum will make this information public."
Wiesenfeld said he believes James is “fearful” of what he might do with the materials ahead of this year’s election, in which she is on the ballot. He said he would not be intimidated.
Months earlier, Wiesenfeld had already put a sharper charge into writing. He sent an agency-wide message to some 2,000 staffers. The email was later deleted. In it, he claimed his supervisor ordered him to find and pursue crimes committed by people affiliated with Trump.
"If you believe Trump is using the [Department of Justice] attorneys to prosecute his enemies and further his political interests, you should find it equally troubling that Tish [James] is doing exactly the same thing,"
That message did not stay internal for long. After it leaked, the office put Wiesenfeld on administrative leave. He was fired on Sept. 5, according to the Times Union reporting cited in the coverage.
A separate New York Post exclusive later reported that Wiesenfeld met for several hours with criminal and civil attorneys from the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice about those same claims. That account also identified Investor Protection Bureau Chief Shamiso Maswoswe as the supervisor he said gave the order to dig for crimes by Trump allies.
White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis called the episode “more proof of the weaponization of the justice system by Letitia James to target President Trump and her political opponents.”
James herself has not issued a personal statement on the latest email. A representative for the attorney general, speaking in August about the earlier controversy, dismissed it as “a personnel matter.”
The same representative said the office “is committed to upholding New York’s laws and protecting the rights and freedoms of all New Yorkers, regardless of political beliefs,” and added, “We strongly reject any assertion to the contrary.”
That answer does not address the concrete mechanics Wiesenfeld described: two formal letters, a same-day destruction deadline, and state detectives at a private front door. It also does not explain why an office that insists it acts without political motive would demand the destruction of materials a former prosecutor now labels evidence.
James has spent years locked in high-stakes fights with Trump and his allies. Trump’s legal team has accused her office of dodging court orders on evidence in the massive civil fraud case. Pattern questions about selective enforcement are not new in her orbit.
Wiesenfeld’s most vivid charge is the door-knocking. He says Executive Protection Detail detectives “repeatedly” came to his home, banged on the door, and left a business card after the latest visit. He treated that card as proof of the pressure campaign and attached it to the Monday email.
State attorneys general maintain security details for legitimate reasons. Using those detectives to deliver a destruction demand to a fired former prosecutor is a different matter. It turns an internal personnel dispute into something that looks like intimidation of a witness-in-waiting.
No public filing yet shows that professional discipline, a civil suit, or a criminal charge has actually been brought against Wiesenfeld. The letters, as he describes them, still hang over him as a threat. He has answered by daring the office to take the fight into open court, where the materials would become public.
The attorney general’s broader portfolio keeps feeding the same credibility problem. She has moved aggressively into other charged cases, including taking over the Cornell rape probe after Gov. Kathy Hochul sidelined the local prosecutor. Trump has already warned that suspects in that matter will not get a fair shake with James in charge.
Those fights sit alongside the civil fraud judgment and years of public sparring with Trump. When a former prosecutor inside her own Investor Protection Bureau says he was ordered to hunt Trump affiliates, then later says he is being threatened into destroying the records, the office’s “personnel matter” line starts to look thin.
Voters do not need a novel legal theory to understand the sequence. An agency-wide email went to 2,000 staffers. It was deleted. The author was put on leave and fired. Letters followed. Detectives followed. A destruction deadline followed. The former prosecutor still has the files and is refusing to erase them.
Related coverage of James’s other high-profile moves, including how Trump has challenged her role in the Cornell case, only sharpens the picture of an attorney general who rarely leaves the political field.
Key gaps remain. The full text of the September 18 and September 30 letters has not been released. The precise contents of the “confidential and privileged” materials are still undescribed in public reporting. The detective’s name on the business card is not public. And it is not yet clear whether any bar complaint, civil action, or criminal referral has actually been filed.
What is clear is the choice Wiesenfeld says he was given: destroy the materials by 5 p.m., or face professional and legal consequences. He chose the second path and put that choice in writing.
For an office that insists it polices the law without fear or favor, the optics are ugly. A fired prosecutor is holding documents he calls evidence. The attorney general’s side is telling him to make them disappear. Detectives have already been to his door.
New Yorkers who expect equal justice from their top lawyer now have a simple test in front of them. If the materials are harmless, the office can let them stand. If they are dangerous to James’s narrative, the pressure campaign makes perfect sense, and that is the problem.
