Skip to content
The Cost
/Rule of Law

A grand jury aimed at the president's investigators

DOJ's Florida 'grand conspiracy' probe kept subpoenaing ex-officials like John Brennan even as its lead prosecutor, Trump ally Joe diGenova, quit with no charges.

StatusOngoingImpactSevere · 4/5Sources5ClarifiedSep 29, 2026

Key facts

  • Career prosecutor who raised evidence concerns was replaced
  • No charges despite dozens of subpoenas
  • Brennan told to appear before grand jury Oct 15

Summary

A Justice Department 'grand conspiracy' investigation in the Southern District of Florida, examining whether officials who investigated Trump since 2016 conspired against him, kept issuing grand jury subpoenas in September 2026 even as its lead prosecutor, Trump ally Joe diGenova, resigned on September 10 without having charged anyone. Former CIA Director John Brennan was subpoenaed to appear before the Fort Pierce grand jury in October.

What happened

Then-acting Attorney General Todd Blanche tapped diGenova, 81, in April 2026 to oversee the grand conspiracy probe and a separate criminal inquiry into whether former CIA Director John Brennan lied to Congress about Russian-interference assessments, replacing career prosecutor Maria Medetis Long, who CBS News reported was removed after raising concerns about the strength of the evidence. ABC News reported the probe had issued dozens of subpoenas but produced no criminal prosecutions over the past year. diGenova resigned on September 10, 2026, amid what ABC's sources described as dissatisfaction from Trump and senior Justice Department officials; the department said it was 'grateful to Joe diGenova for his many years of service.' Days before his exit, witness lawyers were notified of upcoming grand jury subpoenas, and on September 15 Brennan's lawyer said Brennan had been ordered to appear before a grand jury in Fort Pierce, Florida on October 15.

Impact on the United States

Directs federal criminal process at former officials over their past investigations of the president, after a career prosecutor who questioned the evidence was replaced, which erodes the independence of federal prosecutions and signals to current investigators and intelligence officers that scrutiny of a president can bring criminal exposure.

Documented effects

  1. Career prosecutor Maria Medetis Long, who had raised concerns about the strength of the evidence, was replaced by Trump ally Joe diGenova, appointed in April 2026.[1][2]
  2. The probe produced no criminal prosecutions despite dozens of subpoenas issued over the past year to officials involved in past investigations of Trump, according to ABC News.[3][1]
  3. diGenova resigned on September 10, 2026 after Justice Department officials reportedly lost confidence in his leadership; the department thanked him for 'his many years of service.'[1][2][3]
  4. Former CIA Director John Brennan was subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury in Fort Pierce, Florida on October 15, 2026; his lawyer Ken Wainstein said 'There's no precedent for this situation.'[4]
  5. Former special counsel Jack Smith told the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 29, 2026 that he would not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution from Trump and his allies.[5]

Why this is rated severe

Uses a federal grand jury to investigate former intelligence and law-enforcement officials who investigated the president, after a career prosecutor who, CBS News reported, raised concerns about the evidence was removed; rated 4 for the risk to prosecutorial independence, not 5 because no one has been charged.

no charges filed as of Sept 29, 2026; Brennan ordered to appear before a Fort Pierce, Florida grand jury on Oct 15, 2026

Corrections & updates [2]

Every change to a fact on this page after publication is logged here, newest first.

  1. ClarifiedSeverity rationale

    Attributed the account of the prosecutor's removal to CBS News. Severity unchanged.

    + Show previous and current text
    Previously
    Uses a federal grand jury to pursue former intelligence and law-enforcement officials who investigated the president, after a career prosecutor who doubted the evidence was removed, a serious institutional harm to prosecutorial independence; not rated 5 because no one has been charged.
    Now
    Uses a federal grand jury to investigate former intelligence and law-enforcement officials who investigated the president, after a career prosecutor who, CBS News reported, raised concerns about the evidence was removed; rated 4 for the risk to prosecutorial independence, not 5 because no one has been charged.
  2. ClarifiedDisplay copy

    Replaced 'hand-picked' with the record's description and matched the record on the prosecutor's removal.

Sources [5]

Image: Miami92 (English Wikipedia user), Public domain (Wikimedia Commons)

View all