Special Prosecutor: Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx Lied To The Public in Smollett Case

Cook County special prosecutor Dan Webb has issued his report on the Jussie Smollett scandal with scathing findings of misconduct by the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office. The findings include a determination that Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx lied to the public about her communications and role in the scandal. Despite the highly improper handling of the case (including the dropping of the original charges against Smollett), Chicago voters still reelected Foxx who has an appalling record in office. For a native Chicagoan, it is an all-too-familiar pattern of corrupt or incompetent elected officials continuing in office. The question, however, is whether Foxx will face any bar action for allegedly lying to the public about the handling of the case.

The report confirms what many of us have long stated about the Smollett case. The evidence of his guilt was obvious from the start, particularly given his ridiculous account of being attacked around 2am by roaming MAGA-hatted, racist Trump supporters screaming “This is MAGA country.”

By March 2019, prosecutors secured a 16-count grand jury indictment against Smollett for filing false police reports. Then suddenly a few weeks later, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx dropped all charges – a decision that was universally condemned. The outcry was louder due to Foxx’s correspondence with powerful friends of Smollett and the refusal of her office to fully explain why the charges were dropped.

Webb was appointed Special Prosecutor and Smollett was indicted a second time in Feb. 2020. Ultimately, the jury found Smollett guilty of all but one count of criminal conduct.

Webb confirms what was long suspected: prosecutors thought that they not only had a strong case but a case worthy of prosecution. The report details how the office made “false and/or misleading statements” about the decision to drop the charges for a ridiculous agreement that Smollett perform just 15 hours of community service and pay a $10,000 fee as punishment.

The report found that Foxx’s office “breached its obligations of honesty and transparency.”

The report also found that Foxx had made false or misleading statements about her communication with Smollett’s sister, actress Jurnee Smollett. Foxx told the public that her conversations occurred before Smollett became a suspect. Webb says that those statements were false.

State’s Attorney Foxx learned by February 8, 2019 that Mr. Smollett had become a suspect in CPD’s investigation, yet she continued communicating with Ms. Smollett through February 13, 2019 including via five text messages and three phone calls. State’s Attorney Foxx then made false statements to the media claiming she ceased all communications with Ms. Smollett as soon as she learned that Mr. Smollett was a suspect in CPD’s investigation and no longer merely a victim.

Webb also found that Foxx continued to play a role in scuttling the case after she publicly recused herself.

There is also this alarming line:

Ms. Smollett said that when she asked if Mr. Smollett was now a suspect, State’s Attorney Foxx reponded: “Your brother should be fine as long as he stays consistent.

Given the findings, the question is whether the Illinois bar will review the matter. Foxx’s specific statements could run afoul of ethics rules. Attorneys are generally barred from making “a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.

Foxx is clearly responsible for the breaches found by Webb. Yet, the report details how she knew Smollett was a suspect in communicating with his family and continued to act in the case after promising to recuse herself. Those are serious allegations worthy of an investigation by the bar. Foxx may have undisclosed defenses or explanations. However, there will be few real answers unless the court refers the matter to the Illinois bar (or bar members ask for such a review).

Here is the report: Webb Report


91 thoughts on “Special Prosecutor: Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx Lied To The Public in Smollett Case”

  1. This Turley guy’s gone full idiot.

    When a group of violent extremists attempted to overturn the result of a Presidential election, he said it was no big deal and he complained the media was being hysterical, but here he is freaking out that a DA engaged in shenanigans around the crime of filing a false police report.


    I’m glad Smollett was eventually prosecuted and convicted, but talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

    1. Yes, all those violent extremists… oh, the sheer horror to see grifting politicians claiming horror on the scale of the blitz happening right here in our own hallowed halls. How could you look at that onslaught and not hide your eyes?

      It’s just a shame all those portly boomers milling about couldn’t have been more peaceful like the BLM-Antifa protestors who over the summer caused over a billion dollars in damage and took 39+ lives.

      Maybe one day you will know fear. In the meantime, we’ll just keep pointing and laughing at your dysfunctional ilk.

    2. “. . . a mountain out of a molehill.”

      At the time Smollett orchestrated the hoax, it was not considered a “molehill.” Why is it only now, after he’s been convicted and he’s been caught with a DA in his pocket, that the case is considered a “molehill?”

    3. “the media was being hysterical”

      The media was being hysterical and focusing in on the wrong things. Gradually the truth is being revealed. There were more than protestors. There were instigators who promoted entering the capital and being arrested. These same instigators are on video communicating with one another and involved in breaking through the fences. The media was focused on advocacy journalism, not the truth. Who were those instigators, one of whom was one of the original twenty on the FBI website? Why do we not hear about him? Why won’t the FBI report about Why was he quietly removed from the website? At this point, one can not be sure, but the deeper the outside investigations go, and the more videos put together, it looks more like a false flag operation where the FBI was involved.

      You might say that sounds silly, but we see some of these same people repeatedly. Take the Governor Whitmer kidnapping where the FBI or their stooges numbered a great deal more than those said to be involved in her abduction. Look at the history of the FBI and look at the FISA warrants. We have a problem the left doesn’t want to know about.

      Sam has a good point below regarding your point. “At the time Smollett orchestrated the hoax, it was not considered a “molehill. Why is it only now, after he’s been convicted and he’s been caught with a DA in his pocket, that the case is considered a “molehill?”

      I would like to hear your answer to Sam’s question.

      1. “I would like to hear your answer . . .”

        I suspect that you will sooner see pink unicorns hovering over Midtown.

  2. “Perhaps Dylan understood our current culture of ego-drama. Good on Dylan for being other-directed.”

    When an individual destroys his ego, a tyrant fills the void.

    Perhaps you do not realize this. Or perhaps you do.

    (I don’t want to contradict my own plea, so I’m replying on this post.)

  3. Why do people presume that a savior would even want to save them? Maybe he has reconsidered.

  4. “Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx dropped all charges . . .”

    So, pursue a case that is clearly bogus — because, race. (See the Duke lacrosse hoax, et al.)

    And don’t pursue a case for which there is ample evidence — because, race. (Smollett, et al.)

    One might think that those “D” DA’s elevate race over evidence, the law, justice. (I believe that’s called “racism.”)

  5. “The findings include a determination that Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx lied to the public about her communications and role in the scandal.”
    She’s a Dim and committed ideologue. So what else is new?

  6. So, Turley wants everybody to know that a lawyer lied? I wish he had the same conviction with the lawyers who are looking at disbarment for lying for Trump.

  7. FOXX is a Soros Prosecutor she lets criminals out refuses to prosecute others. Chicago out of control crime is a reflection of Foxx. Foxx is also close to Hollywood crowd and Obama’s. She should have her license to practice law suspended for years. They need to clean out the Chicago prosecutors’ office and bring in real Hard-Core LAW and Order Prosecutors. They also need to throw out Lori Lightfoot.

    1. She probably took the advice of Jussies good friends…Kamala, and Corey Booker who needed Jussie to help pass their “Anti Lynching” bill, and both were gleefully exclaiming this hoax was a “Modern Day Lynching”. Not to mention Jussies good buddy, Michelle Obama who’s aide supposedly contacted the Kim’s office and talked her out of prosecuting the liar.

  8. I don’t like how cruel and unfair humans can be. They should be punished somehow for being this way.

    1. “You bring me the man, I’ll find you the crime.”

      – Lavrentiy Beria, Chief of Soviet Police

  9. Anonymous says:

    “In other news about Fox News employees who should be condemned, but whom Turley is unlikely to address.”

    I would not hold your breath waiting for Turley to denounce Watters though, to his credit, I don’t believe Turley has ever appeared on Watter’s show. Turley will appear with the likes of Ingraham, Carlson and Hannity, but apparently, he won’t stoop to appear with Watters or Mark Levin.

    Turley has ethical high standards, don’t you know- Carlson, the “1/6 Truther,” and Hannity and Ingraham, the two-faced Trumpists who begged Trump *privately* to say something to stop the riot but *publicly* blamed everyone but Trump for the mayhem!

    Turley won’t leave Fox News because he knows CNN and MSNBC aren’t likely to take him back. His reputation will never recover for his *acquiescing* in all these loathsome lies by his Fox colleagues. He probably could get work at Newsmax or One America News, but Turley has high standards, don’t you know!

    1. Whatever you need to tell yourself dude. If it makes you feel vindicated, great. In the meantime, we’ll just keep laughing at you.

      1. We’ll see who has the LAST laugh. If Trump is ultimately convicted civilly or criminally of fraud, that may wipe that smile off your face.

        1. Jeff, you are a lawyer. Maybe you can explain to me what Trump did that was illegal, so that he could be found guilty of criminal conduct?

            1. That sounds smart, much smarter than the conclusion drawn in a NYT’s article where the writer sounded ignorant of the law and business matters.

          1. Clearly Jeff can’t see a frame-up even if it bites him on the nose. I bet he also bought Adam Schiff’s Russiagate hoax. There’s something to be said about someone who pretends to be a know-it-all pundit, but can’t see the big picture.

        2. “We’ll see who has the LAST laugh. If Trump is ultimately convicted civilly or criminally of fraud, that may wipe that smile off your face.”

          You are a lawyer and you leaped to the low-hanging fruit? I guess my lawyer friends are correct when they communicate their disdain for quality of their profession. I personally enjoy the Pavlovian knee-jerk reaction of limbic-dominated leftys when they think they smell Faux news. Trump is old news, Fox (although still better than the rest, but I would not choose to eat a less-rotten apple) is pretty much old news.

          No matter what happens to Trump, I’ll still enjoy the unhinged responses from your type. Be sure to keep a napkin or handkerchief within reach, a lively limbic system does lead to a good bit of drooling.

    2. “I would not hold your breath waiting for Turley to denounce Watters “

      Jeff, for what? Peacefully asking Fauci a question? You need to read beyond the headlines that Anonymous the Stupid produces. You know better.

      1. You call me a “parasite” and Young calls me a “whoopie cushion” and Witherspoon calls me a “troll.”

        Turley you must be very proud of attracting the likes of these sophomoric name-callers.
        But, of course, it’s civil to call people names on this blog.

        I call them “Trumpists” because they support and defend Trump. Therefore, I don’t believe they take offense at the description. I suspect they are proud to be so identified. If not, please advise why you take offense.

        1. So Jeffy, how’s that TV you looted working out? Do you rob grocery stores too?

  10. When local police refuse to do something about illegal aliens, they say it’s a federal matter.

Comments are closed.