US
Attorney
Andrew
Boutros
had
a
hell
of
a
week.
Last
Thursday,
the
head
of
the
Northern
District
of
Illinois
announced
that
he
was
dismissing
all
charges
against
the
“Broadview
6,”
professing
himself
to
be
deeply
upset
about
gross
misconduct
before
the
grand
jury.
Never
mind
that
during
that
same
hearing,
he
admitted
to
having
known
about
that
misconduct
since
October
and
failed
to
mention
it
to
the
court.
Then
this
Thursday
Boutros
put
out
a
press
release
insisting
that
he
is
absolutely
not
investigating
E.
Jean
Carroll,
the
woman
sexually
assaulted
and
then
defamed
by
the
president
despite
reports
from
every
major
news
outlet
in
the
country
that
he’s
doing
exactly
that.
The
implosion
of
the
case
against
protesters
outside
the
ICE
facility
in
suburban
Chicago
has
been
well-documented.
Boutros,
a
former
federal
prosecutor
who
previously
led
white
collar
prosecutions
at
Dechert,
admitted
that
AUSA
Sheri
Mecklenburg:
vouched
and
misstated
the
law
in
her
first
presentation
to
the
grand
jury;
removed
jurors
in
the
second;
and
engaged
in
ex
parte
communications
with
jurors
in
the
third.
With
hand
on
heart
—
we
assume!
—
he
assured
Judge
April
Perry
that
no
one
in
his
office
ever
intended
to
bend
the
rules.
He
only
proceeded
with
the
tainted
grand
jury
to
avoid
the
appearance
of
forum
shopping.
Boutros
did
not
explain
why
he
let
the
prosecutor
who
got
no
billed
on
her
first
outing
and
behaved
so
inappropriately
at
her
second
take
a
third
crack
at
the
panel.
His
office
then
launched
a
damage
control
campaign,
loudly
trumpeting
an
investigation
into
that
one
bad
apple
Mecklenburg’s
prior
cases.
But
even
as
Boutros
insisted
that
he’s
a
REAL
lawyer,
not
a
common
Lindsey
Halligan,
it
emerged
that
his
office
is
leading
a
perjury
investigation
into
the
82-year-old
advice
columnist
who’s
been
trying
to
collect
almost
$90
million
from
the
president
for
the
past
three
years.
The
supposedly
false
statement
took
place
in
a
deposition(!)
in
October
of
2022.
Here’s
the
pertinent
exchange:
Q:
Are
you
presently
paying
your
counsel’s
fees?
A:
This
is
a
contingency
case.
Q:
So
you’re
not
paying
expenses
or
anything
out
of
to
date;
is
that
correct?
A:
I’m
not
sure
about
expenses.
I
have
to
look
that
up.
Q.
Is
anyone
else
paying
your
legal
fees,
Ms.
Carroll?
A:
No.
In
fact,
a
non-profit
associated
with
Reid
Hoffman,
the
founder
of
LinkedIn
and
prominent
supporter
of
liberal
causes,
was
paying
some
of
the
upfront
case
expenses,
which
Carroll’s
counsel
voluntarily
disclosed
in
April
of
2023.
Trump’s
lawyers
made
a
big
stink
about
it,
which
is
kind
of
amazing
considering
that
Alina
Habba,
Joe
Tacopina,
and
Todd
Blanche,
who
represented
Trump
in
the
Carroll
cases,
collected
millions
from
the
Trump
campaign
and
associated
PACs.
Judge
Lewis
Kaplan
gave
them
extra
time
to
depose
Carroll,
and
when
they
took
their
caterwauling
to
the
Second
Circuit,
the
judges
said
it
was
clear
that
Carroll
simply
forgot
and
then
corrected
the
record
when
she
remembered
—
no
harm,
no
foul.
But
now
the
Trump
administration
sees
a
chance
to
do
to
Hoffman’s
non-profit,
American
Future
Republic,
what
it
did
to
the
Southern
Poverty
Law
Center,
and
take
out
Carroll,
to
boot.
According
to
the
New
York
Times
and
Washington
Post,
Boutros’s
office
is
investigating
whether
AFR
instructed/conspired
with
Carroll
to
lie
about
the
source
of
her
litigation
funding,
with
an
eye
to
potentially
charging
them
all
with
money
laundering
and
obstruction.
Yesterday,
Boutros’s
office
put
out
a
very
carefully
worded
statement
Note
that
Boutros
does
not
deny
that
his
office
is
investigating
AFR
for
conspiring
with
Carroll
to
commit
perjury
—
just
that
she’s
the
target
of
the
investigation.
Which
is
pretty
much
what
you’d
expect
from
a
guy
who
looked
a
federal
judge
in
the
eye
last
week
and
pinky
swore
that
“there
was
no
desire
to
mislead
the
Court
and
no
deliberate
misconduct
on
the
part
of
the
prosecutors.”
It’s
possible
that
Andrew
Boutros
thinks
he’ll
come
out
the
other
side
of
this
without
too
much
stink
on
him.
That
he
won’t
be
the
next
Aileen
Cannon,
or
a
Todd
Blanche,
or
an
Alina
Habba.
He
certainly
tried
to
assure
Judge
Perry
that
he
wasn’t
like
those
other
hacks,
he’s
a
real
prosecutor
who
doesn’t
play
fast
and
loose.
And
yet
here
he
is,
barely
a
week
later,
making
clear
that
the
reek
of
corruption
is
coming
from
his
office.
Liz
Dye produces
the
Law
and
Chaos Substack and podcast. You
can
subscribe
by
clicking
the
logo: