Women EVERYWHERE ARE OUTRAGED As Trump Just CROSSED A LINE!
The Michael Fanone Show
Jun 6, 2026
Transcript
An 82-year-old woman took Donald Trump to court twice and beat him in front of two juries. Then he ran it up the
appeals court twice. And six federal judges looked at the whole thing and sided with her every single time. She
did everything right. She used the system the way it's supposed to be used.
And this week, as a reward for winning, the Justice Department of the United States opened a criminal investigation into her. Her name is Eugene Carol. And
in all my years as a cop, I can tell you right now, this case is complete [ __ ] And let me tell you who she is in case her name doesn't ring a bell.
Carol was a magazine columnist for most of her life. And she said that back in the mid 1990s, Donald Trump assaulted her in the dressing room of a Burgdoff
Goodman and she took him to court over it. A federal jury in New York heard the evidence and found Trump liable for
sexually abusing her and for defaming her when he turned around and called her a liar. They awarded her $5 million.
Trump appealed and his appeal went to three federal judges on the second circuit who rejected it without a single
disscent. Then there was a second case, a separate defamation trial because Trump wouldn't stop going after her in public. Another jury, another finding.
Except this time they decided he'd acted with actual malice. They hit him with 83.3 million. 65 million of that as
straight punishment. He appealed that one, too. And another panel of three federal judges rejected it unanimously, just like the first.
In other words, this woman took the most powerful man in the country to court twice in front of juries of ordinary citizens, and she beat him both times.
Then he ran it up the appeals court twice and six different federal judges looked at the whole thing and sided with her every time with not one of them
writing a word in his favor. That's the person the Justice Department has now decided to investigate for a crime. The
crime they're floating is perjury. And the theory is that somewhere inside her own lawsuits under oath, she'd lied. And look, I'm not going to stand here and
tell you that's impossible because I don't have the grand jury file and neither do you. Perjury is a real charge and people do lie under oath. But here's
the thing. The label on the front of the case file is the least interesting part of it. Start with the timing. Last September, the president of the United
States stood up in public and told his attorney general by name to go prosecute the people who'd come after him. He
didn't hide it or soften it. He said it out loud on camera for the whole country to hear. And within weeks, the indictments started rolling in.
President Trump is publicly pressuring Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his political enemies. He's calling for charges against Democratic Senator Adam
Schiff, former FBI Director James Comey, and New York Attorney General Leticia James. Now, some of the president's own supporters say his administration is
going too far and threatening free speech.
James Comey, the FBI director Trump fired back in 2017, got indicted. A judge threw it out. So, they turned around and indicted him again last
month. this time over a photograph of seashells arranged into a couple of numbers which they decided was a threat.
Comey says he never read it that way.
Then Leticia James, the attorney general of New York, who brought the fraud case against Trump, got indicted. A judge threw that one out, too. John Brennan,
the former CIA director, is sitting under an open investigation right now.
And now Eugene Carol, you see the through line? Every single person on that list did one of the same handful of things. They investigated Trump or they charged him or they sued him in one.
That's the qualification for the list.
As far as I can tell, it's the only qualification on the list. The man running this investigation is named Andrew Butress, and he's the United
States attorney in Chicago. And sit with that for a second. Carol's lawsuits happened in New York. If she lied under oath, she lied in a New York courtroom.
The witnesses are in New York. The transcripts are in New York. The judge who ran both trials is in New York. So
why is a prosecutor in Chicago 800 miles away running point on a New York perjury case? Here's why. The Justice Department
has been leaning on a rule that lets headquarters hand a case to almost any prosecutor they want, anywhere in the country, no matter where the supposed
crime actually happened. They pulled the exact same move with Brennan. They handed his case to a prosecutor in Miami, and the reporting on why is
blunt. Other offices looked at the Brennan case, decided it was too weak to touch. So, the department went and found
somebody who'd say yes. In my world, we had a name for that. When the people who knew the case best tell you there's nothing there, and you go shopping for a
different set of hands who will run with it anyway, you're not chasing justice anymore. You're chasing a result. And there may be a specific reason it landed
in Chicago because there's a nonprofit tied to Reed Hoffman based there.
Hoffman's the billionaire who helped fund Carol's legal defense and Trump's people have spent years trying to turn him into the villain of this whole
story. Then there's the man at the very top of this. Todd Blanch is the acting attorney general of the United States and he's recused himself from the Carol investigation. You want to know why?
Because before he ran the Justice Department, he was Donald Trump's personal defense attorney. The most powerful lawyer in the country can't lay
a finger on this case because he used to work for the man whose accuser is now the target. And I want to give you one more detail about the Chicago prosecutor
because it tells you everything about the quality of work coming out of that office. Just last week, Bros had to walk into a courtroom and drop a whole batch
of charges against people who'd protested outside an immigration facility. The reason he had to drop them is that prosecutors working under him
got caught talking to individual grand jurors outside the courtroom, which is something you're flatly not allowed to do. That's not a paperwork error. That's
the kind of misconduct that blows up cases and gets careers put under a microscope. So that's the office and that's the prosecutor the Justice
Department picked to go after an 82-year-old woman who lives in a different state. So when you look at the facts, everything surrounding the
investigation, the timing, the venue, the recused boss, the prosecutor with the shaky record, all of it points in
the same direction. And it's not the direction of a department calmly following the evidence wherever it leads. And remember what this has
already cost her long before today. The appeals court spelled it out in writing.
After Trump came after her in public over and over, she started getting death threats, threats against her physical safety, and she's been living under that
duress for years. She didn't go looking for any of this. She told a jury what happened to her. The jury believed her.
And for that, she spent years with a target on her back. Now, the federal government has decided to add itself to the list of people coming after her.
Here's the part I need you to hold on to. The power to open a federal criminal investigation is one of the greatest responsibilities this country puts in
anybody's hands. The second you decide it's fine to aim that power at the people who beat you in court, you give up any say over who picks it up next or
who they decide to aim it at. A weapon doesn't care whose hand is holding it.
And I want to close by talking to one group directly, the career prosecutors and agents inside the Justice Department. The people who took the same
oath I took. You see what I see. You know what a real perjury case looks like and you know this isn't one. So, let me
say the thing that a lot of you are only saying quietly. Anyone still telling themselves this DOJ hasn't been weaponized is lying to themselves and
they know it. And if you know it, you've got two choices. Stand up and refuse to carry it out, even if it costs you the
job. Or stay. Go along and accept what that makes you. There's no version where you keep your head down and keep your
conscience clean. I carried a badge for 20 years. I know what I'm asking and I'm asking it anyway. Anyone left in the DOJ
who still has a conscience, quit your
[ __ ]



















