Ex-CIA Director Brennan rebuffed over DOJ probe evidence

Zoe Tillman, Bloomberg News on Oct 15, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Washington dismissed a lawsuit filed by former CIA Director John Brennan to compel the Justice Department to take special steps to preserve records in an ongoing criminal investigation into President Donald Trump’s perceived political enemies.

In a decision Thursday, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb wrote that Brennan’s allegations that he’s being targeted by the Trump administration for partisan reasons “are deeply concerning,” but that he lacked legal standing to press preemptive claims over how records are being handled in Justice Department’s probe.

Brennan had urged the court to intervene while the criminal investigation is ongoing, raising concerns that evidence might be destroyed and undercut his future defense against an indictment, particularly on the grounds that any prosecution would be “vindictive” or “selective.”

Cobb wrote that Brennan hadn’t offered specific enough claims that Justice Department officials or attorneys are failing to preserve records. The judge wrote that she was “sympathetic” to the challenge Brennan faced trying to address conduct that might be happening in secret, but that didn’t overcome his burden to show that he faced “imminent harm.”

Efforts by Brennan’s lawyers to highlight past reports of Trump and other officials deleting or destroying messages, social media posts and other types of records couldn’t save his lawsuit, Cobb concluded.

“Those allegations, presuming their truth as the court must at this stage, are damnable and unbecoming of any officer of the federal government,” she wrote. “But those allegations are untethered from this case.”

Brennan’s attorneys Ken Wainstein and Dan Gelber said in a statement that Cobb’s ruling “was based on the technical legal issue of standing, not on the merits of Director Brennan’s claim that the Justice Department is using the criminal justice system to target and investigate him for politically vindictive reasons.”

Brennan “has served notice that the government’s conduct and its document preservation will be carefully scrutinized in the event of any future indictment,” his lawyers said. They added that Brennan “will continue to vigorously defend himself against these baseless investigations, and he will challenge any attempt to use the criminal justice system for personal and political retribution.”

A Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The Justice Department is pursuing a controversial investigation into whether Brennan and other former government officials conspired in the past to violate Trump’s civil rights, Bloomberg News previously reported. Prosecutors appear to be focused on investigative work under previous Democratic administrations, especially related to an intelligence assessment on Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election.

It’s unclear how far along the probe is and whether prosecutors are close to seeking indictments. The Justice Department team handling the investigation has experienced leadership turnover in recent weeks, Bloomberg previously reported.

Ahead of a September hearing in the case, Brennan’s attorney told the judge that he had received a subpoena to testify before a grand jury in Florida. Brennan led the Central Intelligence Agency from 2013 to early 2017, during President Barack Obama’s administration.

Brennan has denied wrongdoing and sued the administration in July to preserve the paper trail of the department’s investigation. His lawyers argued that any indictment would be an unlawfully vindictive or selective prosecution, and that Brennan would be entitled to argue for access to the department’s records about the criminal probe to bolster that defense.

The complaint alleged that given past public reports of problems with the administration’s record-keeping practices — including top officials’ use of messaging platforms set to auto-delete — they were justified in asking a court to step in ahead of time.

Vindictive prosecution claims are historically hard to win, but there is precedent. Earlier this year, a federal judge in Tennessee dismissed a human-smuggling case against Salvadoran migrant Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, finding that the administration pursued the case in retaliation for his high-profile legal fight against being deported.

Former FBI Director James Comey is pressing a vindictive and selective prosecution claim as he fights an indictment that alleges he threatened Trump by sharing a picture online of seashells arranged on a beach to spell out “86 47.”