Gone quiet · last update Oct 16, 2026 / John Owen Brennan

The Justice Department's investigation of John Brennan and its 'grand conspiracy' probe

Overview · reviewed October 28, 2026

The Justice Department has investigated former CIA Director John Brennan since 2025, first over whether he lied to Congress.[1] He later also came under a wider Florida inquiry into whether former law enforcement and intelligence officials conspired against President Donald Trump.[2] By October 2026, two prosecutors had left the "grand conspiracy" probe without charging a case.[3][4] Brennan had been subpoenaed to testify, and a judge had dismissed his suit to make the department preserve its records. He has not been charged.[2][5]

Read the timeline

Follow this story to see new developments when you return.

He later also came under a wider Florida inquiry into whether former law enforcement and intelligence officials conspired against President Donald Trump.[2] By October 2026, two prosecutors had left the "grand conspiracy" probe without charging a case.[3][4] Brennan had been subpoenaed to testify, and a judge had dismissed his suit to make the department preserve its records. He has not been charged.[2][5]

Coverage over time

Share of tracked outlets · weekly (UTC)

Week of 2025-10-20 (UTC): 3%, 5 of 194 tracked outlets (0 left, 1 center, 4 right)Week of 2025-10-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-03 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-10 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-17 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-24 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-26 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-16 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-16 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-30 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-20 (UTC): 3%, 5 of 157 tracked outlets (1 left, 2 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-04-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-04 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-11 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-18 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-25 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-29 (UTC): 8%, 46 of 569 tracked outlets (8 left, 22 center, 16 right)Week of 2026-07-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-20 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-03 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-10 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-17 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-24 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-31 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-07 (UTC): 2%, 9 of 480 tracked outlets (2 left, 4 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-09-14 (UTC): 5%, 24 of 480 tracked outlets (7 left, 9 center, 8 right)Week of 2026-09-21 (UTC): 2%, 8 of 479 tracked outlets (4 left, 2 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-09-28 (UTC): 3%, 12 of 476 tracked outlets (6 left, 3 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-10-05 (UTC): under 1%, 2 of 479 tracked outlets (0 left, 0 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-10-12 (UTC): 3%, 13 of 476 tracked outlets (3 left, 4 center, 6 right)Week of 2026-10-19 (UTC): under 1%, 2 of 479 tracked outlets (0 left, 0 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-10-26 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outlets, so far

LeftCenterRightLighter bar: this week so far

Each bar is the share of the outlets on our Left / Center / Right rating scale that we tracked publishing that week which carried reporting on this story, split by the outlets' ratings. We track more outlets now than in the archive, so a share keeps earlier and later weeks comparable. An outlet counts once a week however much it published, and outlets in one ownership or syndication group count as one on each side they appear on. A rating describes the outlet, not the report. A gap means no such reports were collected that week, not that nothing was reported anywhere. Weeks run Monday to Sunday in UTC, so a report published on a Sunday evening in US Eastern time counts in the next week. 1 more outlet off the scale (not rated, or outside the left-right graphs) also reported; they are not in this chart. See them.

Weekly counts, outlets and reports (10 weeks with coverage)
Outlets on the rating scale that carried this story each week, of the outlets tracked that week, newest first
Week of (UTC)LeftCenterRightOf trackedShareReceipts
Oct 19, 20260022 of 479under 1%
Oct 12, 202634613 of 4763%
Oct 5, 20260022 of 479under 1%
Sep 28, 202663312 of 4763%
Sep 21, 20264228 of 4792%
Sep 14, 202679824 of 4805%
Sep 7, 20262439 of 4802%
Jun 29, 20268221646 of 5698%
Apr 20, 20261225 of 1573%
Oct 20, 20250145 of 1943%

Latest coverage

The newest reporting in this story's record.

  1. Oct 16, 2026 · first reported · Headline from GOP Daily Brief

    Biden-Appointed Judge Throws Out John Brennan Lawsuit Claiming Evidence Destruction in Trump Probes

Background

The investigation began over his testimony to Congress. The department confirmed in July 2025 that it was investigating him.[1] In October 2025, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, referred Brennan to the Justice Department for prosecution. He argued that testimony Brennan gave the committee in 2023 may have violated the federal law against false statements to Congress.[6]

Read the full background (3 more paragraphs)

The inquiry widened in 2026. In April, shortly after the department appointed Joe diGenova, a conservative ally of Trump, to take over the investigation, it subpoenaed several witnesses to testify before a federal grand jury in Washington. A Florida-based career prosecutor who had helped lead the inquiry left the case after expressing doubts about the legal viability of a prosecution.[7] In July, Brennan sued the administration, asking a court to order officials to preserve the records of the investigations targeting him. He said he would need them to defend himself against any eventual .[1]

Its leaders then left without bringing charges. In September, diGenova left the department after five months leading the wider investigation into Trump's foes without charging a single case, and the department pressed on with subpoenas.[3] Shortly before leaving, he signed a summoning Brennan to testify in October before the Florida grand jury. Brennan also remained the target of a separate inquiry into whether he made false statements.[2] Kurt Olsen, a lawyer who had backed Trump's false 2020 election claims, then resigned from the probe as well.[4] Brennan has denied wrongdoing and accused the department of pursuing him for political reasons.[2]

In October, released memos showed that notes from a secret 2023 meeting between then-special counsel Jack Smith's team and Brennan had been left blank.[8] On October 15, a federal judge in Washington dismissed Brennan's lawsuit. The judge ruled that he did not yet have standing to sue over the investigation, which targets him for his role in reviewing the 2016 election.[5]

Supporting stories (8)
  1. Ex-CIA Director John Brennan sues the Trump administration, demanding it preserve records of investigations into him
  2. Ex-CIA Director John Brennan issued subpoena in Trump “grand conspiracy” investigation, lawyer says
  3. Trump’s ‘grand conspiracy’ probe presses on with subpoenas after the lead prosecutor’s exit
  4. Second prosecutor resigns from Justice Department ‘grand conspiracy’ probe targeting Trump foes
  5. Judge tosses ex-CIA head John Brennan’s document preservation lawsuit against the Justice Department
  6. Barack Obama's CIA director John Brennan referred to DOJ for prosecution
  7. Cooperating witnesses in criminal probe of ex-CIA Director Brennan subpoenaed to testify before grand jury, sources say
  8. Jack Smith team secretly met ex-CIA chief John Brennan in 2023, but FBI agents left notes blank…

The full record

Each date is when an update was first reported.

All 10 recorded updates

October 2025

  1. Barack Obama's CIA director John Brennan referred to DOJ for prosecutionHeadline from Newsweek · 5 outlets

Coverage & sources

Read the reports, see how much was collected over time, or compare outlets by political leaning.

Coverage & sources →