The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has initiated an investigation into Bill Pulte, the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). This inquiry stems from concerns raised by eight Democratic senators, including Elizabeth Warren and Dick Durbin, regarding Pulte's actions in referring prominent Democrats and public officials to the Justice Department for alleged crimes. The senators have suggested that these actions may have been politically motivated and represent a misuse of government resources.

A letter from GAO managing director A. Nicole Clowers confirmed the acceptance of the investigation request, although no timeline for its completion has been established. Pulte, who oversees aspects of the mortgage market, has publicly criticized figures perceived as adversaries of the Trump administration, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook, accusing them of mortgage fraud. These accusations have faced legal challenges, with a federal judge recently dismissing charges against James that were based on Pulte's referrals.

The senators' request highlighted concerns that Pulte bypassed the FHFA's inspector general, a position intended to prevent the misuse of power for partisan purposes. Reports indicate that the White House removed the inspector general prior to these events. In response to the allegations, a White House spokesperson defended Pulte, describing him as a loyal advisor to President Trump. The GAO has stated it will coordinate with the FHFA's acting inspector general to avoid duplicating efforts in the investigation.

In a related context, data from the Deportation Data Project, analyzed by The New York Times, reveals that federal immigration operations, particularly those initiated during the Trump administration, have resulted in thousands of arrests in major cities, with a significant portion of those arrested lacking prior criminal records. From January 20 to October 15, only 7% of arrests involved individuals with violent convictions, while 84% of arrests in Washington, D.C., were of individuals without any criminal charges.

The Trump administration justified these aggressive enforcement actions by claiming that sanctuary city policies hindered Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from apprehending immigrants with criminal backgrounds. This led to the deployment of additional federal forces, including Border Patrol and the National Guard. However, local leaders have expressed concerns that these operations have not enhanced public safety and have disrupted community life, prompting protests.

The data indicates a shift in immigration enforcement priorities, with a decrease in the share of individuals with criminal convictions detained by ICE, from 46% at the beginning of the Trump administration to 28% by mid-October. The Supreme Court's recent decision allowing immigration officers to consider race and ethnicity in enforcement has further contributed to the increase in arrests of individuals without criminal records. The operations, characterized by militarized tactics, raise critical questions about the efficacy and humanitarian implications of current immigration enforcement strategies.