No White House is immune to hypocrisy, but the Trump administration has elevated it to an art form. Last night, CNN reported that the Department of Justice is pursuing a criminal investigation against E. Jean Carroll, the writer who accused Donald Trump of rape in the 1990s and won nearly $90 million in civil judgments against him. The probe focuses on whether Carroll committed perjury during her testimony in two civil lawsuits - both of which she won, because that's how confident the DOJ is in its case.
This news arrives less than 10 days after Trump - acting as a private citizen, you see - announced a $1.8 billion slush fund with the same Justice Department to reward his political allies, potentially including January 6 rioters. The DOJ official Trent McCotter solemnly declared that "the use of government power to target individuals for improper and unlawful political, personal, or ideological reasons should not be tolerated by any Administration," presumably while keeping a straight face. Using government power to target individuals for political reasons? That sounds exactly like the Carroll probe and most of the DOJ's recent moves.
Carroll's lawsuits infuriated Trump, which is understandable when you've been found liable for sexual abuse by a jury. Judge Lewis Kaplan noted that although Carroll didn't prove "rape" under New York Penal Law, the jury found Trump did exactly that in the common understanding. Trump insulted Carroll on Truth Social and during trials, insisted he didn't know her despite photographic evidence, and mistook her for his ex-wife Marla Maples in a deposition - which is a special kind of denial.
The perjury accusation centers on whether Carroll lied about financial support from Reid Hoffman, a LinkedIn co-founder. In a 2022 deposition, Carroll said she had no outside support, but two weeks later her lawyers revealed funding from a nonprofit Hoffman leads. Judge Kaplan already considered and dismissed concerns about this testimony, allowing Trump's team to question her again and then concluding her credibility wasn't in doubt. But the DOJ is pressing on, because why let a judge's ruling get in the way of a good political vendetta?
The investigation is being overseen by Andrew Boutros, the U.S. attorney in Chicago, which is unusual but legal - until this administration, when DOJ started assigning faraway offices to handle political cases. Boutros's office has a track record: it recently dismissed charges against the "Broadview Six" after prosecutorial misconduct that left Judge April Perry "incredibly shocked." Perry scolded Boutros, saying "Your sole goal is to do justice. Your client is justice itself. That trust has been broken."
Any investigation into Carroll faces the same problem: Boutros and the Trump Justice Department no longer have the benefit of the doubt. Even if the probe sputters, a spurious criminal investigation is extrajudicial punishment - defendants must spend time and money on attorneys, and the Southern Poverty Law Center recently found itself cut off from financial channels due to a dubious indictment.
Trump ran for office decrying the "weaponization" of the Justice Department. Turns out he just wanted it on his side. The Broadview and Carroll cases show how effectively he's achieved that.