"Conservative lobbyist" (read: corporate conman) eschews courts. "He was 'not going to court,' Mr. Nass said, adding, that’s not how he operated." Ipse dixit, he can't fix it.
Interesting article *albeit with annoying split infinitive.(Fun fact: circa 1979, I learned what a split infinitive was when Howard Bray, then Executive Director of the Fund for Investigative Journalism told me my proposal almost lost. vote when James Jackson Kilpatrick noted it had a split infinitive. I once corrected myself in mid-speech to County Commission, apologizing for a split infinitive. Lesson learned.(From The New York Times:
Conservative Lobbyist Hired Man to Violently Extort Client, U.S. Says
Before his arrest last month, Josh Nass, a lawyer, used his connections to lobby the Trump administration, including for a client seeking clemency.
A conservative lawyer and lobbyist has been indicted on extortion and stalking charges that appear connected to a client who was pardoned by President Donald J. Trump.
Josh Nass, who was arrested by F.B.I. agents in Manhattan last month, faces charges of extortion and cyberstalking in a six-count indictment unsealed on Thursday in Federal District Court in Brooklyn.
Mr. Nass, according to federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York, hired a man to violently extract $500,000 from a client. The client had already paid $100,000, prosecutors said. But Mr. Nass was owed more, and told the man he had hired to assault the client’s son or force him “into a car with masked men,” according to prosecutors.
The client has not been named in court papers. But filings and previous reporting from The New York Times suggest it is Joseph Schwartz, who hired Mr. Nass to help win clemency after he was convicted of fraud and tax crimes related to the collapse of a nursing-home empire.
Mr. Schwartz reported to prison in August, was pardoned by Mr. Trump in November and attended the White House Hanukkah party in December. Disclosure filings indicate that Mr. Nass began lobbying for Mr. Schwartz the day before he was pardoned.
In a statement Henry E. Mazurek, a lawyer for Mr. Nass, called his client “an innocent man” and said the charges were “entrapment on steroids.”
“We look forward to trial and a quick acquittal,” Mr. Mazurek said.
Demand for pardon brokers like Mr. Nass has risen under Mr. Trump, who has often granted clemency to allies, bypassing the Justice Department’s system for vetting worthy recipients. Some in Mr. Trump’s orbit charge $1 million or more to those facing or serving jail time.
The White House has denied that Mr. Trump’s acts of clemency are influenced by lobbyists.
Mr. Nass has traveled in the circles around Mr. Trump, posting photos on social media with Donald Trump Jr. and Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel. Mr. Nass bought a $1.8 million condoat Trump Tower in 2021, according to The New York Post.
But court filings have painted a dark portrait of Mr. Nass and what prosecutors say was an aggressive scheme he devised to obtain his full fee.
The man Mr. Nass hired was working for law enforcement as a confidential witness and had his own checkered legal past, with convictions for racketeering and illegal firearms possession.
After Mr. Nass’s client said he could not pay him in full, asking instead for a payment plan, Mr. Nass bristled, according to prosecutors. In a meeting with the man he hired to extract his fee, according to prosecutors, Mr. Nass told the man that he intended to make his client pay “every penny of what they owe.”
He was “not going to court,” Mr. Nass said, adding, that’s not how he operated.
USDOJ press release:
Lawyer Charged with Attempted Extortion of Former Client and Client’s Son Over Alleged $500,000 Debt
Yesterday, at the federal courthouse in Brooklyn, a complaint was unsealed charging Joshua Nass, an attorney licensed to practice in New York, with attempted Hobbs Act extortion for enlisting an individual to threaten and force a former client and his son into paying Nass $500,000. Nass was arrested yesterday and will make his initial appearance today before United States Magistrate Judge Clay H. Kaminsky.
Joseph Nocella, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and James C. Barnacle, Jr., Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), announced the arrest and charge.
“As alleged, Nass plotted the violent extortion of one of his own clients and hired an individual to ‘do anything and everything” to force the client’s son to pay for services,” stated United States Attorney Nocella. “It will always be a priority of our Office to hold accountable those abusing a position of trust by violating the laws and oaths they have been sworn to support.”
“Rather than honestly representing his client, Joshua Nass allegedly chose to shake him down by hiring an enforcer to extort payment. The FBI prioritizes crushing violent crimes offenses and extortion schemes,” stated FBI Assistant Director in Charge Barnacle.
As alleged in court filings, starting in early January 2026, Nass recruited an individual (Individual) to force a former client (John Doe 1) and his son (John Doe 2) to pay Nass $500,000 that Nass claimed he was owed for services he purportedly rendered on behalf of John Doe 1. Nass provided the Individual with a phone number and addresses associated with John Doe 2, and Nass instructed the Individual to visit John Doe 2 at his home in an effort to intimidate John Doe 2 into paying Nass. Nass paid the Individual $3,000 in cash in exchange for Individual’s efforts to force John Doe 2 to pay Nass. Additionally, Nass told the Individual to “do anything and everything” to force John Doe 2 to pay the defendant.
Between January 2026 and March 2026, Nass contacted the Individual several times to plan meetings and discuss methods by which the Individual could extort payment by John Does 1 and 2 of the debt purportedly owed to Nass. Nass and the Individual discussed the Individual physically assaulting John Doe 2, or forcing John Doe 2 into a car with masked men and threatening him to make someone in John Doe 2’s family pay Nass. On one occasion, Nass told the Individual that, if John Doe 2 rebuffed an attempt to pay, the Individual could not be a “human being” with John Doe 2. Nass agreed to pay the Individual at least $15,000 for his continued efforts at extorting John Does 1 and 2, with a $5,000 up-front payment and the remainder after John Doe 2 paid Nass.
The charge in the complaint is an allegation, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. If convicted, Nass faces up to 20 years in prison.
The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Organized Crime and Gangs Section. Assistant United States Attorneys Victor Zapana, Anna L. Karamigios and Kamil R. Ammari are in charge of the prosecution, with the assistance of Paralegal Specialist Danielle Barber.
The Defendant:
JOSHUA NASS
Age: 34
Charleston, South Carolina
E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 26-MJ-54
John Marzulli
Denise Taylor
United States Attorney’s Office
(718) 254-6323
TH/ ALK:V AZ/KRA
F. #2026R00061
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------X
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- against -
JOSHUA NASS,
TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL
COMPLAINT AND
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT
OF ARREST WARRANT
(18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a), 2)
Case No. 26-MJ-_5±_
Defendant.
---------------------------X
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, SS:
JOHN-PATRICK RABENA, being duly sworn, deposes and states that he is a
Special Agent with the Federal Bureau oflnvestigation, duly appointed according to law and
acting as such.
In or about and between December 2025 and March 2026, both dates being
approximate and inclusive, within the Eastern District of New York and elsewhere, the defendant
JOSHUA NASS, together with others, did knowingly and intentionally attempt to obstruct, delay
and affect commerce, and the movement of articles and commodities in commerce, by extortion,
in that NASS and others attempted to obtain property, to wit: money, from John Doe 1 and John
Doe 2, individuals whose identities are known to the deponent, with their consent, which consent
was to be induced by wrongful use of actual and threatened force, violence and fear.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 195l(a) and 2)2
The source of your deponent's information and the grounds for his belief are as
follows: 1
1. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau oflnvestigation (the "FBI"),
and I have been since 2018. I investigate violent criminal enterprises and crimes of violence,
including extortion schemes. During my tenure at the FBI, I have participated in numerous
investigations of violent criminals and criminal enterprises, and I have used a variety of
investigative techniques, such as interviews of witnesses, cooperating witnesses, and confidential
informants; physical surveillance; reviews of telephone records; and warrants to search physical
premises, cellphone data, social media accounts, and cell-site location data.
2. I have personally participated in the investigation of the offense discussed
below. I am familiar with the facts and circumstances of this investigation from, among other
sources of information: (a) my personal participation in this investigation; (b) my training and
experience; ( c) my review of documentary evidence obtained during the investigation; and
( d) information obtained from other law enforcement officers, witnesses and other sources.
3. Since approximately January 2026, law enforcement authorities, including
the FBI, have been conducting an ongoing investigation into an extortion scheme orchestrated by
the defendant JOSHUA NASS and targeted at, among others, John Doe 1 and John Doe 2. As
set forth in more detail below, the investigation has revealed that NASS directed a confidential
witness (the "Confidential Witness," or "Witness") to threaten, intimidate, and assault John Doe
1 and one of his sons, John Doe 2, in an effort to force John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 to pay NASS
Because the purpose of this Complaint is to set forth only those facts necessary to
establish probable cause to arrest, I have not described all the relevant facts and circumstances of
which I am aware.3
approximately $500,000.2 As detailed more fully below, NASS and the Confidential Witness,
who is based in Staten Island and Brooklyn, have communicated and met in person multiple
times from approximately January 2026 to March 2026. At law enforcement's direction, the
Confidential Witness has recorded various conversations and meetings with NASS.
4. According to the Confidential Witness and as reflected in WhatsApp
messages I reviewed as part of this investigation, the defendant JOSHUA NASS first contacted
the Confidential Witness on or about January 6, 2026.3 Thereafter, on or about January 8, 2026,
the Confidential Witness and NASS met in New York City. During that meeting, a recording of
which I have reviewed, NASS told the Confidential Witness, among other things, that John
Doe 1 owed NASS $500,000 for what NASS described as lobbying services rendered on behalf
of John Doe 1 from approximately December 2025 to January 2026; that John Doe 1 had told
NASS that he did not have the money; and that John Doe 2 had asked NASS for a "payment
plan," which NASS viewed as an "insult." NASS further stated, among other things, that NASS
had found "bank statements" for what he believed to be an insurance policy associated with John
Doe 2, and that NASS therefore believed that John Doe 2 could pay the money. NASS further
2 The Confidential Witness is cooperating with law enforcement in the hopes of
being offered a cooperation agreement and possible immigration benefits. The Confidential
Witness was previously convicted of racketeering, for which he was sentenced to 46 months in
prison, and subsequently possessed a firearm as a convicted felon. The information provided by
the Confidential Witness has been corroborated by, among other sources of evidence, records,
law enforcement surveillance, and other independent information obtained by law enforcement
pursuant to the investigation.
3 Where statements of others are set forth, except as otherwise noted, they are set
forth in sum and substance and in part. Additionally, the defendant JOSHUA NASS and the
Confidential Witness communicate in both English and Russian. Excerpts of recorded
conversations contained herein are based on draft transcripts and working interpretations of
Russian statements by FBI linguists. Throughout this Complaint, use of the term "UI" in the
draft transcripts means that the audio was unintelligible to the reviewing linguist.4
stated, among other things, that he intended to "make him [John Doe 1] pay for every penny he
owes me," but that NASS was "not going to no court" because that was "not how [NASS]
work[ ed]."
5. During the January 8 meeting, the defendant JOSHUA NASS and the
Confidential Witness discussed the Confidential Witness approaching John Doe 2 at his home to
intimidate John Doe 2 into paying NASS. To that end, NASS informed the Confidential
Witness where John Doe 2 lived and stated that he would send the Confidential Witness John
Doe 2's address after their meeting. As reflected in the below draft transcript excerpt, NASS
told the Confidential Witness that the Confidential Witness should "do anything and everything"
to force John Doe 2 to pay NASS:
Witness:
Let's say-give me the address, let me see and, er--er-listen, if I
need to sock him a few times ...
NASS:
I will give you the right to do anything and everything, but I am
telling you this is a scared person. He's already scared.
6. During the same meeting, the defendant JOSHUA NASS and the
Confidential Witness also discussed the Confidential Witness's fee for helping NASS collect
from John Doe 2, as reflected in the below draft transcript excerpt:
NASS:
Ok. How much-how much do you want for this?
Witness:
I don't know how this, how this work ...
NASS:
This will not be once. Just so you know.
Witness:
Let's say, ten, twenty. Ten. Let's say ten.
NASS:
Ok.
Witness:
[ ... ]
Only I gonna need some expense to go, monthly-shmonthly, you
know, gas [UI]5
NASS:
Just tell me how much.
Witness:
So, about-
NASS:
Tell me how much.
Witness:
Ok, let's do three.
NASS:
Deal. Errr-
Witness: Ok, but let's . . . Don't worry about it. Send me the info. Let me
do my homework.
NASS: Ok.
Based on my training and experience, as well as my participation in the investigation, I submit
that, during the above-excerpted exchange, NASS agreed to pay the Confidential Witness at least
$10,000 ("ten"), with an initial payment of $3,000 ("three"), and the Confidential Witness agreed
to start planning the extortion for NASS ("Send me the info. Let me do my homework").
7. Later on January 8, 2026, the defendant JOSHUA NASS sent the
Confidential Witness two addresses in Rockland County, New York and a phone number.
NASS indicated that John Doe 2 was associated with those addresses, and that the phone number
belonged to John Doe 2. A review of law enforcement databases shows that John Doe 2 is in
fact associated with the addresses and phone number provided by NASS to the Confidential
Witness. The following day, NASS confirmed to the Confidential Witness that John Doe 2
resided at one of those addresses.
8. According to the Confidential Witness, and as reflected in text messages
between the Confidential Witness and the defendant JOSHUA NASS that I have reviewed, on or
about January 13, 2026, NASS instructed the Confidential Witness to visit John Doe 2 in order to
compel him to pay NASS what NASS claimed to be owed. Later that night, the Confidential
Witness told NASS that the Confidential Witness had gone to John Doe 2's residence, but that6
John Doe 2 had shut the door on the Confidential Witness after the Confidential Witness told
John Doe 2 about being sent by NASS.4
9. Thereafter, on or about January 29, 2026, the defendant JOSHUA NASS
and the Confidential Witness met in person in New York City to discuss the Confidential
Witness's efforts to collect the money purportedly owed to NASS from John Does 1 and 2.
During the January 29 meeting, NASS paid the Confidential Witness $3,000 in cash for the
Confidential Witness's services up to that point, which the Confidential Witness provided to law
enforcement.
10. According to the Confidential Witness, during the meeting, the defendant
JOSHUA NASS stated that he wanted John Doe 2 to understand that NASS would not accept
John Doe 2's failure to pay NASS for the money owed. NASS instructed the Confidential
Witness to physically assault John Doe 2 and to threaten John Doe 2. NASS agreed to pay the
Confidential Witness $15,000 for doing so, with a $5,000 up front payment and the remaining
$10,000 after John Doe 2 paid NASS.
11. As reflected in Telegram messages between the defendant JOSHUA
NASS and the Confidential Witness, which I have reviewed, later on January 29, 2026, NASS
told the Confidential Witness that NASS received "confirmation" that John Doe 2 was in Miami,
Florida, but that John Doe 2 planned to travel to New York City that evening. In a further text
message, which I reviewed, NASS suggested that the Confidential Witness "mention" to John
Doe 2 that the Confidential Witness knew John Doe 2 "was in Miami[,] as a way of showing
you're keeping tabs."
4 The Confidential Witness had not gone to John Doe 2's residence.7
12. The defendant JOSHUA NASS and the Confidential Witness met in
person again the following day, and they continued to discuss the scheme to extort John Doe 2,
including the possibility of forcing John Doe 2 from his residence into a car and physically
assaulting John Doe 2. NASS indicated that that he was willing to give the Confidential
Witness $5,000 to pay for any additional men that the Confidential Witness would bring with
him in an effort to intimidate John Doe 2. During the course of this meeting, a recording of
which I have reviewed, NASS indicated that, if John Doe 2 rebuffed the attempt to pay, NASS
did not want the Confidential Witness to behave "like a human being with" John Doe 2.
WHEREFORE, your deponent respectfully requests that an arrest warrant for the
defendant JOSHUA NASS be issued so that he may be dealt with according to law.
~CK~
Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Sworn to before me by telephone this
13th day of March, 2026
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Federal court docket sheet:
Santul Nerkar is a Times reporter covering federal courts in Brooklyn.
Kenneth P. Vogel is based in Washington and investigates the intersection of money, politics and influence.
No comments:
Post a Comment