BY MIRABEL ODETA
The U.S. Justice Department has reportedly launched a criminal investigation into writer E. Jean Carroll, the journalist and former magazine columnist who successfully sued President Donald Trump in two major civil cases related to sexual abuse allegations and defamation.
According to a source familiar with the matter, federal prosecutors are examining whether Carroll may have committed perjury during sworn testimony connected to the lawsuits she brought against Trump. The investigation is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago and centers on statements Carroll made under oath regarding financial support tied to her legal battles.
The development marks a dramatic escalation in the long-running legal and political conflict between Carroll and Trump, whose courtroom battles have remained in the national spotlight for years. The investigation itself does not automatically mean criminal charges will be filed, but it signals that federal authorities are now scrutinizing aspects of Carroll’s testimony in detail.
The source said prosecutors are specifically reviewing a 2022 deposition in which Carroll allegedly stated that she had not received outside funding for her lawsuits against Trump. However, Carroll’s legal team later disclosed that billionaire entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn and a prominent Democratic donor, had assisted with some of her legal expenses.
Investigators are reportedly examining whether Carroll’s earlier testimony conflicts with later disclosures and whether any inconsistencies rise to the level of criminal perjury under federal law.
Neither the Justice Department nor Carroll’s attorney, Robbie Kaplan, immediately responded to requests for public comment following reports of the investigation.
The inquiry comes after Carroll secured two major courtroom victories against Trump in highly publicized civil trials.
In May 2023, a federal jury found that Trump had sexually abused Carroll during an encounter in a New York department store during the mid-1990s. Jurors also concluded that Trump later defamed Carroll by publicly attacking her credibility and denying her claims. However, the jury did not find Trump liable for rape under the legal definitions presented during the trial.
Months later, in January 2024, another jury ruled that Trump had continued defaming Carroll through public comments and ordered him to pay approximately $83.3 million in damages.
Trump has consistently denied all allegations made by Carroll and has continued fighting aspects of the judgments through appeals and additional legal motions. He has repeatedly described the lawsuits as politically motivated and has maintained that he never assaulted Carroll.
The newly reported investigation also raises broader political questions about the Justice Department’s direction under Trump’s administration.
Since returning to office, Trump’s Justice Department has pursued several investigations involving individuals considered political opponents or critics of the president. In some cases, federal prosecutors have already brought criminal charges against figures tied to previous disputes with Trump or his allies.
Critics argue these investigations risk creating the appearance of politically motivated prosecutions, while supporters of the administration say the Justice Department is simply enforcing the law equally regardless of political affiliation.
The source familiar with the matter also stated that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has recused himself from involvement in the Carroll investigation. Blanche previously served as one of Trump’s personal attorneys during appeals connected to the Carroll lawsuits, creating a potential conflict of interest.
Blanche reportedly stepped into the role after taking over responsibilities previously handled by Pam Bondi and has moved quickly to implement several legal and policy priorities aligned with Trump’s administration.
Legal experts say proving criminal perjury can be difficult because prosecutors must demonstrate that false statements were made knowingly and intentionally under oath and that the statements were materially important to the proceedings.
At this stage, it remains unclear how advanced the investigation is, whether witnesses have been subpoenaed, or whether prosecutors believe they have sufficient evidence to pursue charges.
The case is likely to intensify political debate surrounding Trump’s legal strategy, the independence of federal law enforcement, and the increasingly blurred line between political conflict and criminal investigations in Washington.
With both Trump and Carroll still engaged in ongoing legal disputes, the latest development ensures that one of the most closely watched legal sagas in modern American politics is far from over.
Original article
Comments