Trump People Clarify…E. Jean Carroll is NOT the subject of a Criminal investigation…

The investigation involves donations made by a nonprofit founded by the liberal billionaire Reid Hoffman to pay for Ms. Carroll’s legal bills, according to people with knowledge of the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing inquiry….

…

The investigation into Mr. Hoffman’s nonprofit has been overseen by top department officials in Washington, according to people with knowledge of the matter. But Mr. Blanche, who represented the president in one of his appeals of Ms. Carroll’s legal victories, has recused himself.

Ms. Carroll declined to comment through a representative. A representative for Mr. Hoffman did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Critics say the investigation proves Mr. Trump’s appointees are bent on executing Mr. Trump’s personal agenda, even if it means abandoning their commitment to the public, particularly the victims of sexual assault.

“Two of the reasons survivors of sexual abuse often don’t come forward are, first, a fear of not being believed, and second, a fear of retaliation,” said Jacqueline Kelly, a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan who led the unit that investigated civil rights offenses, including sexual abuse and exploitation.

“Putting a survivor in the cross hairs of a federal criminal investigation involving perjury strikes at both of those fears,” added Ms. Kelly, now a partner with Boies Schiller Flexner in New York.

Mr. Trump and his legal team have vehemently contested Ms. Carroll’s allegations and have accused the president’s political enemies of backing her claims in an unsuccessful effort to destroy him….

…

Most of the department’s recent targets have been current or former officials who have investigated, defied, insulted, opposed or otherwise irked Mr. Trump, an inversion of the prosecutorial credo of investigating crimes, not people prejudged as criminals.

Still, like public officials including the special counsel Jack Smith, New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, and the Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis — all of whom have been targeted by the Justice Department — Ms. Carroll chose to bring a case against Mr. Trump. In 2019, she accused Mr. Trump of having raped her decades earlier; he denied it and insulted her, and she sued him for defamation.

Several years later, after New York passed a law allowing adult victims of sexual abuse a chance to sue, she filed another suit against him. She was awarded judgments in both cases, which Mr. Trump has sought to appeal.

Even when pursuing former and current public officials, Mr. Trump’s Justice Department has delved into their private lives. Ms. James was originally charged with crimes related to a house she owns in Norfolk, Va. (The case was thrown out.) The current indictment against Mr. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, centers on a photograph he shared of seashells on a Carolina beach, years after he left public service….

…

The issue arose in April 2023, when Mr. Trump’s lawyers wrote to the judge before the first of Ms. Carroll’s trials, accusing her of concealing financial support her case had received from Reid Hoffman, the billionaire co-founder of LinkedIn and a harsh critic of Mr. Trump’s.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers said then that they had just learned of Mr. Hoffman’s role from Ms. Carroll’s lawyers, and that the disclosure raised “significant questions” about her credibility.

Ms. Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta A. Kaplan, responded to the judge, arguing that Mr. Hoffman’s financial support was irrelevant to Ms. Carroll’s legal claims, and that she had nothing to do with obtaining the outside funding. Ms. Kaplan said her client had only just recalled that her lawyers had secured the funding for certain expenses and fees, which Ms. Kaplan promptly disclosed to Mr. Trump’s lawyers.

The judge barred Mr. Trump’s lawyers from introducing such evidence at the 2023 trial, in which a jury found Mr. Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and awarded Ms. Carroll $5 million in damages. The ruling was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. “Ms. Carroll plausibly represented that she had forgotten about the limited outside funding,” a unanimous three-judge panel said.

The appeals panel added no evidence suggested Ms. Carroll was personally involved in securing the funding, interacted with the funder or even knew the funder’s political position….

More….

Note…

Trump has asked the US Supreme Court to overturn the judgements….

The court has put off the request several times….