DOJ Probes Perjury in Funding of Trump Accuser's Legal Battle
The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into billionaire Reid Hoffman's nonprofit that paid $7 million toward E. Jean Carroll's legal fees in her lawsuits against President Donald Trump.
The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into a nonprofit run by billionaire Reid Hoffman that funded a portion of E. Jean Carroll's legal fees in her civil lawsuits against President Donald Trump. U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros explicitly denied that any criminal investigation into Carroll has been opened. The federal probe reveals how well-heeled donors attempted to weaponize the justice system against conservative figures, with Hoffman's American Future Republic now facing scrutiny over $7 million in payments to Carroll's legal team.
Carroll told then-Trump attorney Alina Habba in a 2022 videotaped deposition, "This is a contingency case." When asked directly if anyone else was paying, Carroll said "No." Tax filings show Hoffman's nonprofit paid Carroll's law firm approximately $7 million in 2020.
Prosecutors are examining American Future Republic for possible crimes including money laundering, conspiracy, and obstruction. The investigation underscores the federal government's focus on financial crimes rather than political retribution, demonstrating the Trump Justice Department's commitment to investigating potential crimes regardless of political affiliation.
Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder with an estimated $2 billion fortune, represents the political dimension of this legal battle. He contributed at least $1 million to the Biden Victory Fund, $10 million to Future Forward, and $4 million to the Republican Accountability PAC during the 2024 election cycle. This pattern illustrates how left-wing financiers are increasingly bankrolling litigation against conservative figures under the guise of personal injury claims.
Carroll secured two jury verdicts against Trump totaling over $88 million, with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the $5 million sexual abuse verdict in December 2024. Yet the DOJ probe now examines the truthfulness of her financial disclosures and allegations, separate from the juries' determinations on the underlying claims.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche recused himself from the Carroll investigation due to his prior representation of Trump on the appeals. Prosecutors are pursuing the case independently, proving the administration's commitment to the rule of law despite claims of political retaliation. The investigation has been referred to U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros, a Trump appointee whose office is currently implementing sweeping reforms after facing criticism for prosecutorial misconduct in unrelated cases.
Hoffman called the scrutiny "absurdly false" and "retaliation" in a May 29 social media statement. "Trump hopes that these fraudulent investigations will silence those who stand up to him," Hoffman wrote. "He is wrong. I will not bend the knee." Courts and juries already validated Carroll's core claims against Trump, making the perjury allegation a matter of legal accountability rather than political vengeance.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals noted in its December 2024 ruling that "Ms. Carroll plausibly represented that she had forgotten about the limited outside funding counsel obtained in September 2020." The appellate court added that evidence "showed that Ms. Carroll simply was not involved in the matter of who was or was not funding her litigation costs."
U.S. Attorney Boutros issued a contradictory statement on May 28 denying his office had opened any investigation into Carroll. "In light of widespread reporting and intense media and public interest in the E. Jean Carroll matter in New York, the Chicago U.S. Attorney's Office can confirm that it has not opened—and has never opened—a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll," Boutros stated. "Any claim to the contrary is categorically false." Multiple sources later reaffirmed to CNN that the investigation remains active within Boutros' office.
The investigation highlights a growing pattern of financial scrutiny against plaintiffs who claim personal victimization while relying on outside political donors. Jeffrey Clark, former top Trump administration official, told the Washington Times that "companies (or their principals) are making money off ordinary Americans only to turn around to try to thwart the political choices made by ordinary Americans."
Carroll's legal team secured additional funding from Hoffman's nonprofit just two weeks before trial in April 2023, notifying the court that they had "secured additional funding from a nonprofit organization to offset certain expenses and legal fees." This timing and the concealment of outside funding suggests an attempt to hide the political nature of the lawsuit from the jury.
The Supreme Court has deferred its decision on Trump's appeal of the $5 million verdict 12 times, most recently on May 21. Trump posted a $7.4 million bond to delay payment of the $83.3 million defamation judgment while the high court considers the case.
This investigation exposes the contradiction between Carroll's courtroom assertions and the reality of her financial backers, validating conservative warnings about the politicization of civil lawsuits and the erosion of truth in the courtroom. When major donors to a political party fund litigation against a candidate of the opposing party, the dynamic shifts from a private dispute to potential political interference requiring federal scrutiny.