The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the woman who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault and helped fuel years of media attacks against the president.

The probe reportedly centers on whether Carroll lied under oath about who was paying for her high-profile lawsuits against Trump.

Carroll, a former magazine columnist, made dubious claims in 2019 that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

She never provided a specific year, date, or verifiable evidence.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

Despite that, the story was salivated over by the corporate press, which used her allegations as another weapon against Trump.

Trump has consistently denied every accusation, bluntly calling Carroll a “whack job” and stating she was “not my type.”

A Manhattan jury, however, still found Trump liable for sexual abuse in 2023 and ordered him to pay $5 million.

In another civil case in 2024, the same system somehow decided Trump owed Carroll $83.3 million for defamation, despite glaring contradictions in Carroll’s own testimony.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

Now, federal prosecutors are reportedly examining whether Carroll committed perjury when she swore under oath that she was paying her own legal fees.

During a deposition, Carroll told Trump attorney Alina Habba that no one was helping fund her lawsuits.

Later evidence revealed that left-wing billionaire Reid Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn and known donor to Democrat causes, had actually financed part of Carroll’s legal effort.

That revelation has raised serious questions about both Carroll’s honesty and the media narrative built around her.

For years, pundits and Democrat operatives treated her claims as gospel, painting Trump as guilty long before any court ruled.

Yet now, cracks in her credibility are not just visible but wide open.

The investigation focuses on the possibility that Carroll’s 2022 deposition deliberately misled the court.

Perjury, lying under oath, is a serious federal crime.

Prosecutors want to know if Carroll intentionally concealed Hoffman’s role in paying for her lawsuits, which would mean her entire testimony was built on deception.

WATCH:

It is no small irony that the woman celebrated by anti-Trump activists as a “truth teller” might now face criminal exposure for lying in federal court.

The same media that amplified her every word with emotional headlines now finds itself in an uncomfortable silence as truth creeps out from behind the curtain.

Carroll’s own public comments have often hurt her credibility.

In one interview years ago, she bizarrely claimed that “rape is sexy” and called it a “fantasy,” prompting CNN anchor Anderson Cooper to abruptly cut to a commercial break.

FLASHBACK: Trump "rape" accuser E. Jean Carroll says "rape is sexy" during CNN interview with Anderson Cooper pic.twitter.com/m743Q4Z7Ja

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) January 26, 2024

For most people, that kind of comment would be career-ending.

For Carroll, it only made her more interesting to media outlets hungry for anti-Trump ammunition.

The original juries in her cases had their own inconsistencies.

The panel could not bring itself to declare that Trump raped Carroll, but still somehow found him liable for a sexual assault claim based on what appeared to be a reduced and uncorroborated version of her accusation.

Trump and his legal team slammed the verdicts as political judgments masquerading as justice.

Now, the DOJ’s attention has shifted back to Carroll, marking a rare moment where the government may actually scrutinize a Trump accuser instead of the other way around.

For years, the American public watched case after case weaponized against Trump, from the Russia collusion hoax to endless civil suits.

This investigation signals that the tide may be turning.

If the claims of perjury prove true, the implications go far beyond Carroll herself.

It would mean that Trump’s political enemies may have been caught manufacturing false testimony, all while funneling money from wealthy progressive donors into carefully crafted attacks.

Reid Hoffman’s involvement, in particular, exposes the behind-the-scenes machinery of Democrat lawfare against Trump and his allies.

Many conservatives see this investigation not just as overdue accountability, but as a test of whether the Justice Department can apply the law fairly.

The pattern of one-sided persecution against Trump supporters has worn deep in the public’s mind.

It will take more than lip service to convince Americans that Lady Justice still wears a blindfold.

Meanwhile, Trump has continued to fight back publicly.

He has called Carroll’s case “a witch hunt,” maintained his innocence, and accused her team of fabricating claims for political gain and financial benefit.

Considering what has now surfaced about Hoffman’s funding, Trump’s words look less like bluster and more like vindication.

Accusations against conservatives receive breathless headlines and emotional coverage, while evidence of dishonesty or corruption by liberal figures gets brushed aside.

The corporate press has shown once again that their version of journalism requires selective vision.

While the Justice Department’s motives remain unclear, this development cracks open a significant story that could backfire on Trump’s detractors.

Americans deserve to know whether a key figure in one of the most publicized cases against a (at the time) former president has been truthful about her own actions.

If she has not, this saga may become one of the most embarrassing failures of the anti-Trump legal crusade yet.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.