In a fiery rebuttal to allegations he’d criminally misrepresented facts in his mortgage documents, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) sued Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte on Tuesday — accusing him of criminally misusing government databases to baselessly target President Trump’s political opponents.

“Pulte has abused his position by scouring databases at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — two government-sponsored enterprises — for the private mortgage records of several prominent Democrats,” attorneys for Swalwell wrote in a federal lawsuit filed in Washington, D.C. “He then used those records to concoct fanciful allegations of mortgage fraud, which he referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution.”

They said Pulte launched his attack on Swalwell at a particularly inopportune time, just as Swalwell was launching his campaign for California governor.

Pulte’s attack, Swalwell’s attorneys wrote, “was not only a gross mischaracterization of reality” but “a gross abuse of power that violated the law,” infringing on Swalwell’s free speech rights to criticize the president without fear of reprisal, and violating the Privacy Act of 1974, which they said bars federal officials from “leveraging their access to citizens’ private information as a tool for harming their political opponents.”

Pulte, the FHFA and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

Pulte has previously defended his work probing mortgage documents of prominent Democrats, saying no one is above the law. His referrals have exclusively targeted Democrats, despite reporting on Republicans taking similar actions on their mortgages.

Swalwell’s lawsuit is the latest counterpunch to Pulte’s campaign, and part of mounting scrutiny over its unprecedented nature and unorthodox methods — not just from targets of his probes but from other investigators, too, according to one witness.

In addition to Swalwell, Pulte has referred mortgage fraud allegations to the Justice Department against Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, who have all denied wrongdoing and suggested the allegations amount to little more than political retribution.

James was criminally charged by an inexperienced, loyalist federal prosecutor specially appointed by Trump in Virginia, though a judge has since thrown out that case on the grounds that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed. The judge also threw out a case against former FBI Director James Comey, another Trump opponent.

Cook’s attorneys slammed Pulte in a letter to the Justice Department, writing that his “decision to use the FHFA to selectively — and publicly — investigate and target the President’s designated political enemies gives rise to the unmistakable impression that he has been improperly coordinating with the White House to manufacture flimsy predicates to launch these probes.”

Schiff also has lambasted Trump and Pulte for their targeting of him and other Democrats, and cheered the tossing of the cases against James and Comey, calling it “a triumph of the rule of law.”

In recent days, federal prosecutors in Maryland — where Schiff’s case is being investigated — have also started asking questions about the actions of Pulte and other Trump officials, according to Christine Bish, a Sacramento-area real estate agent and Republican congressional candidate who was summoned to Maryland to answer questions in the matter last week.

Pulte has alleged that Schiff broke the law by claiming primary residence for mortgages in both Maryland and California. Schiff has said he never broke any law and was always forthcoming with his mortgage lenders.

Bish has been investigating Schiff’s mortgage records since 2020, and had repeatedly submitted documents about Schiff to the federal government — first to the Office of Congressional Ethics, then earlier this year to an FHFA tip line and to the FBI, she told The Times.

When Trump subsequently posted one of Schiff’s mortgage documents to his Truth Social platform, Bish said she believed it was one she had submitted to the FHFA and FBI, because it was highlighted exactly as she had highlighted it. Then, she saw she had missed a call from Pulte, and was later asked by Pulte’s staff to email Pulte “the full file” she had worked up on Schiff.

“They wanted to make sure that I had sent the whole file,” Bish said.

Bish said she was subsequently interviewed via Google Meet on Oct. 22 by someone from the FHFA inspector general’s office and an FBI agent. She then got a subpoena in the mail that she interpreted as requiring her to be in Maryland last week. There, she was interviewed again, for about an hour, by the same official from the inspector general’s office and another FBI agent, she said — and was surprised their questions seemed more focused on her communications with people in the federal government than on Schiff.

“They wanted to know if I had been talking to anybody else,” she said. “You know, what did I communicate? Who did I communicate with?”

Schiff’s office declined to comment. However, Schiff’s attorney has previously told Justice Department officials that there was “ample basis” for them to launch an investigation into Pulte and his campaign targeting Trump’s opponents, calling it a “highly irregular” and “sordid” effort.

The acting FHFA inspector general at the time Bish was first contacted, Joe Allen, has since been fired, which has also raised questions.

On Nov. 19, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) — the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — wrote a letter to Pulte denouncing his probes as politically motivated, questioning Allen’s dismissal and demanding documentation from Pulte, including any communications he has had with the White House.

Swalwell’s attorneys wrote in Tuesday’s lawsuit that he never claimed primary residence in both California and Washington, D.C., as alleged, and had not broken any laws.

They accused Pulte of orchestrating a coordinated effort to spread the allegations against Swalwell via a vast network of conservative influencers, which they said had “harmed [Swalwell’s] reputation at a critical juncture in his career: the very moment when he had planned to announce his campaign for Governor of California.”

They said the “widespread publication of information about the home where his wife and young children reside” had also “exposed him to heightened security risks and caused him significant anguish and distress.”

Swalwell said in a statement that Pulte has “combed through private records of political opponents” to “silence them,” which shouldn’t be allowed.

“There’s a reason the First Amendment — the freedom of speech — comes before all others,” he said.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under former-President Joe Biden promised to “swiftly and safely” resettle Afghan allies into the United States, but multiple sources have confirmed the D.C. National Guard shooter came in under that same Biden-era program in 2021.

Biden responded to the “targeted” attack in D.C. just before news broke of how the alleged shooter, 29-year-old Afghan national Rahmanullah Lakanwal, entered the United States under humanitarian parole via Operation Allies Welcome, per DHS and FBI sources, giving him permission to be in country legally. 

In 2021, amid the Afghan withdrawal debacle, Biden’s Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas promised to “swiftly and safely” resettle thousands of Afghan allies into the United States and confirmed that DHS had denied evacuees from entering the U.S. due to “derogatory” information obtained during the vetting process.

After the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that was followed by a Taliban takeover of the country, the Biden administration launched a large operation to support and resettle vulnerable Afghans, including those that had helped U.S. troops in the past. 

TWO NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS SHOT NEAR WHITE HOUSE, AFGHAN NATIONAL SUSPECT IN CUSTODY: ‘TARGETED’

Due to the rushed nature of the evacuation, plus broader concerns over immigration and parole-release policies, fears arose over whom the country may have been letting in. 

Mayorkas said during a September 2021 press conference that 120,000 people had been evacuated from Afghanistan since the beginning of the U.S. withdrawal, just months earlier. The Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center found that nearly 800 aircraft evacuated thousands of people over just a 17-day period in August 2021.

At the time, Mayorkas touted the robust biometric screening and vetting process in place — in both the U.S. and transit countries — in order to make sure every individual entering the country was properly screened. 

In response to a question at the time from Fox News’ Jake Gibson, Mayorkas confirmed that there already had been individuals flagged with “derogatory information” during the vetting process, but did not specify the number of people flagged.

Mayorkas assured that 400 U.S. Customs and Border Patrol employees and the Transportation Security Administration would be brought up to assist. Part of the effort included moving refugees from military bases designated by the Pentagon to house and vet refugees before they enter the United States.

Lakanwal, who entered the U.S. in September 2021 after America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, had his permission to stay in the U.S. granted under Operation Allies Welcome, sources said. Authorities are investigating the shooting as a possible act of international terrorism. 

FBI officials confirmed two West Virginia National Guardsmen remain in critical condition after being shot in the head during an apparent targeted attack just a few blocks from the White House.

During comments Wednesday night, President Donald Trump called Biden “a disastrous president” and “the worst in the history of our country.”

WHITE HOUSE BLASTS MS NOW CORRESPONDENT’S ‘BEYOND SICK’ REACTION TO DC SHOOTING OF NATIONAL GUARDSMEN

He also ridiculed the former president for flying Lakanwal “on those infamous flights that everybody was talking about.”

“Nobody knew who was coming in, nobody knew anything about it,” Trump pointed out about the Afghan evacuation process under Biden. 

He also slammed broader parole and immigration policies under Biden, claiming Lakanwal’s “status was extended under legislation signed under President Biden. “

“This attack underscores the single greatest national security threat facing our nation,” Trump added, announcing that the government “must now reexamine every single alien who has entered our country under Biden.”

Trump also appeared to suggest the death penalty for Lakanwal, stating toward the end of his address that “we will bring the perpetrator of this barbaric attack to swift and certain justice – if the bullet’s going in the opposite direction – (unintelligible).”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Meanwhile, former President Biden did respond to the tragic D.C. attack, but his comments came before news of how the shooter entered the United States.

“Jill and I are heartbroken that two members of the National Guard were shot outside the White House,” Biden posted on X, just before news broke that the shooter entered the country under his administration’s rapid resettlement program. 

“Violence of any kind is unacceptable, and we must all stand united against it. We are praying for the service members and their families.”

Fox News Digital Reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment on the news that Lakanwal came into the United States under the Biden-era program, but did not receive a response. Attempts to reach former DHS Secretary Mayorkas also were unsuccessful in time for publication.

Fox News’ Brooke Singman and Kelly Laco contributed to this report.

President Trump has united the Latino vote … in its disdain for the policies of his second term.

A new study from the Pew Research Center found that a majority of U.S. Latino adults disapprove of the job Trump has done since returning to the White House earlier this year.

Ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids throughout the country and continued economic turmoil have led many Latinos to grow upset with the politician — whose 2024 campaign centered on carrying out the “largest deportation operation in American history” and fixing the nation’s fledgling economy.

Pew’s findings revealed that 70% of Latinos disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job as president. When it came to immigration, 65% disapproved of the current administration’s approach to the issue. Regarding the economy, 61% said Trump’s policies have made economic conditions worse.

However, party affiliation still played a significant role in how Latinos graded Trump’s performance. Overall, 81% of 2024 Latino Trump voters approved of his job so far — an impressive level of support, though it has notably dipped from 93% since the onset of his second term.

Among Latinos who voted for Kamala Harris, Trump had a 4% approval rating in February, which has since plummeted to 0%. His approval rating with 2024 Latino nonvoters moved from 42% down to 27%. As a whole, the president’s approval rating among all Latino groups has slumped from 42% at the beginning of the year to 27% this fall.

In the Pew study, Latino voters also expressed pessimism about their future in the U.S. Of those surveyed, 68% said the situation for U.S. Latinos is worse today than it was a year ago, 9% responded that it was better and 22% felt it was about the same. Harris voters overwhelming felt the situation is worsening for Latinos at 89%; 66% of nonvoters agreed with that assessment; and 31% of Trump voters felt Latinos were worse off now than last year.

A plurality of voters who went red in 2024 — 40% — felt the situation for Latinos in the U.S. was about the same year over year. Additionally, 28% of that voting bloc believed U.S. Latinos are better off now compared with 2024.

This data set lines up with a recent Axios/Ipsos poll conducted in partnership with Noticias Telemundo.

Of the more than 1,100 people surveyed, 65% said that it’s a “bad time” to be Latino or Hispanic in the U.S.; when the poll was conducted in March 2024, that figure stood at 40%. When broken down by party, 84% of Democrats said it was a bad time, compared with 68% of independents and 32% of Republicans.

At 78%, a majority of those polled by Pew felt that Trump’s policies have been more harmful than helpful to the Latino community. Harris voters were once again united against Trump with 97% agreeing that his policies have negatively affected their community. Nonvoters were in agreement with 78% feeling the Republican president’s policies have had adverse effects on Latinos.

Trump voters were split on the issue with 41% saying Trump’s policies have been helpful to Latinos, 34% believing they’ve been harmful and 22% responding that they’ve had no effect.

These findings seemingly muddle the narrative that Latinos nationwide have made a rightward turn politically in recent years.

In the 2024 presidential election, Trump garnered 48% of the Latino vote compared with Harris’ 51% share and significantly jumped past the 36% clip that he got in the 2020 presidential election. Initial 2024 exit polls actually underestimated Latinos’ Trump support, with the Republican candidate tracking at 46% of the Latino vote on election day.

Additionally, 47% of naturalized citizens of all ethnic backgrounds voted for Trump in 2024, compared with 38% in 2020. In that same voting bloc 51% voted for Harris in 2024, a notable drop from the 59% who voted for Joe Biden in 2020.

Latino naturalized citizens recorded a 12% bump in voting for Trump, jumping from 39% in 2020 to 51% in 2024.