DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus DOJ launches criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll: Sources

Acting AG Todd Blanche recused himself from the investigation, sources said.

The Department of Justice has launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the former Elle magazine columnist who accused President Donald Trump of sexual assault, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

The investigation is allegedly centered around whether Carroll committed perjury during her civil lawsuits against President Trump, after which she was awarded a $5 million judgment, the sources said.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche recused himself from the investigation, given his past representation of Trump in the matter, the sources said.

CNN first reported news of the investigation, which sources said is being led by the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Andrew Boutros.

The probe is the latest among a series of investigations launched by the DOJ into perceived foes of Trump, a number of which have faced significant obstacles in the courts and before grand juries.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the investigation to ABC News. Attorneys for Carroll also declined comment.

Trump was found liable in two civil lawsuits that resulted in judgments totaling nearly $90 million for sexually abusing Carroll in a department store dressing room in the 1990s and defaming her when he denied her claims.

He was found liable in 2023 of sexually abusing Carroll and was also found liable in 2024 in a separate but related defamation case involving Carroll.

Trump earlier this month asked a federal appeals court in New York to pause its ruling rejecting his challenge to her defamation lawsuit so he could pursue an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The request came after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to rehear Trump's claim of immunity and his attempt to substitute the United States as a defendant in the case.

https://abcnews.com/US/doj-launches-criminal-probe-jean-carroll-sources/story?id=133367551

So let's review shall we?

Blanche is the head of the DOJ.

Blanche represented trump in the lawsuit against Carl which he lost.

Trump has tried consistently tried to get this case overturned and failed to do so.

So now the department ran by Blanche, trump's personal attorney on one of these two cases is pursuing criminal charges against the woman a jury determined was trump's victim in not just one but two lawsuits.

Repulsive

TIME TO TALK ABOUT THE DEMS. OR ANYTHING BUT TRUMP AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND HOW IT'S IS OBSEVABLE FACT THAT THE DOJ IS ACTING LIKE SOMETHING RUN BY AN AUTOCRACY ... QUICK, LET'S DEFLECT THE CONVERSATION !!! GIVE ME SOME HYPOTHETICALS - GIVE ME SOME "YOU CAN'T PROVE THIS IS NOT A LEGIT INVESTIGATION" ....

Again - hopefully purple not required.

Of course we should be talking about the Dems! After all it's the Dems who are in control of the White House, the Senate, the House, the EPA, the CDC, the department of education on the DOJ. Why should we be talking about anyone else but the dems!?

I used purple just in case. You never know with this crowd. No need to open that door.

...the pre-emptive purple posse strikes again....

I had to use "per-emptive purple" or it would have been labeled as a lie by you. I'm the only one that used purple. You do realize that a posse consists of more than one person, correct? Or did you realize that and post a lie?

He used all caps and asked if he should have used purple and you said yes. (I'm getting the gist across if not using your exact words.) My post was a joke, which according to you is a reasonable thing to post.

If you both hadn't felt the need to argue with something that hadn't happened yet in the thread due to an apparent insatiable need to be arguing at all times whether there is a reason or not, I wouldn't have found it funny.

On the topic, yes, I think the lawsuit is BS.

Technically she may have perjured herself. If she did, it seems it would have been the misdemeanor version as it wasn't really relevant to the case. And if it was a misdemeanor, it seems it should be past the statute of limitations.

This does appear to be hypocritical "lawfare."

So you agree that in fact I'm the only one who used purple. Thanks. That's what they say when trump says something he has to back out of "He was only joking." "He didn't mean what he said." When you have to explain something was a joke......


The "both of us" were in agreement. You do realize that an argument is a disagreement and back and forth between people with opposing views, correct? None of that happened prior to your post claiming people were arguing. The person arguing would be the one who came in with an opposing view. Do you understand who that was or do you need help with that too?

You should quit while you're still only slightly behind.