Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan Sues Trump, Admin Officials Over Allegedly Vindictive Investigations
Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan Sues Trump, Admin Officials Over Allegedly Vindictive Investigations
Authored by Timothy Frudd via The Epoch Times,
Former CIA Director John Brennan is seeking a court order requiring the Trump administration to retain records related to allegedly vindictive investigations into him and his involvement in probing alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Former Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan testifies before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 23, 2017. Alex Wong/Getty Images
While the Justice Department hadn't formally brought an indictment against Brennan, his lawsuit noted that it had undertaken grand jury investigations in recent months. He accused prosecutors of abusing their authority and said there was reason to believe the administration wasn't preserving records as required under law.
Brennan said the judge's order was necessary to preserve his constitutional rights and evidence that he could use to prove vindictiveness in a would-be prosecution.
"This Administration has adopted a policy of using criminal process and prosecution to punish the President's perceived adversaries," Brennan's legal team wrote in the court filing.
"It is against this backdrop that former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John O. Brennan ... is being vindictively singled out for investigation and prosecution."
The lawsuit filed by Brennan's legal team on Wednesday names President Donald Trump, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, and other government officials as defendants.
A Justice Department spokesperson told The Epoch Times, "While we cannot comment on the existence, or lack thereof, of an investigation, it is certainly rich that John Brennan is accusing anyone of a 'retribution campaign.'"
Brennan's lawsuit focused on two investigations. One centered on an alleged conspiracy to deprive Trump of his rights by probing alleged Russian interference. Another was related to statements he made to Congress regarding an intelligence community assessment of Russian influence during the election.
Brennan's legal team said Justice Department officials have "taken steps that clearly violate well-established norms and limitations on prosecutorial conduct" as part of the Trump administration's investigations.
"Those overreaching actions have violated Director Brennan's constitutional rights and will serve as the basis for challenges to any resulting charges, including motions to dismiss any indictment on the grounds that it is the result of selective and vindictive prosecution," they wrote.
The lawsuit noted that the examination of prosecutors' emails, texts, and other communications would allow the courts to determine if decisions were based on legitimate law enforcement concerns or an effort to "selectively" and "vindictively" prosecute the former CIA director.
"There is a very real risk, however, that some of these materials and communications will no longer exist by the time any such challenges are filed and the court hears them," the lawsuit stated.
Brennan's legal team cited technology changes that it said do not ensure the routine preservation of communications and "ample evidence in the public record" of Trump administration officials failing to meet legal obligations to preserve records as the two reasons for its concern.
The lawsuit said the Trump administration is obligated to preserve records and evidence that would be relevant in a potential challenge if Brennan were indicted. Brennan's legal team pointed to both the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act as regulations covering many of the communications and materials involved in the two investigations.
Brennan was previously referred for criminal prosecution by the House Judiciary Committee over his connection with an investigation that was launched in 2016 into suspected Russian influence on Trump's presidential campaign. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in October 2025 that Brennan allegedly "knowingly made false statements during his transcribed interview" in May 2023 and that his testimony on the 2016 investigation into Trump included "numerous willfully and intentionally false statements of material fact."
In the House Judiciary Committee's criminal referral, Jordan wrote, "Brennan falsely denied that the CIA relied on the discredited Steele dossier in drafting the post-election Intelligence Community Assessment."
Brennan previously accused the Trump administration in December of attempting to judge shop, a practice used to file a lawsuit in a court with a judge likely to give a favorable ruling. The former CIA director asked U.S. Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga of the Southern District of Florida to prevent U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who dismissed the classified documents case against Trump in 2024, from being involved in future proceedings.
Authored by Timothy Frudd via The Epoch Times,
Former CIA Director John Brennan is seeking a court order requiring the Trump administration to retain records related to allegedly vindictive investigations into him and his involvement in probing alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Former Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan testifies before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 23, 2017. Alex Wong/Getty Images
While the Justice Department hadn't formally brought an indictment against Brennan, his lawsuit noted that it had undertaken grand jury investigations in recent months. He accused prosecutors of abusing their authority and said there was reason to believe the administration wasn't preserving records as required under law.
Brennan said the judge's order was necessary to preserve his constitutional rights and evidence that he could use to prove vindictiveness in a would-be prosecution.
"This Administration has adopted a policy of using criminal process and prosecution to punish the President's perceived adversaries," Brennan's legal team wrote in the court filing.
"It is against this backdrop that former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John O. Brennan ... is being vindictively singled out for investigation and prosecution."
The lawsuit filed by Brennan's legal team on Wednesday names President Donald Trump, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, and other government officials as defendants.
A Justice Department spokesperson told The Epoch Times, "While we cannot comment on the existence, or lack thereof, of an investigation, it is certainly rich that John Brennan is accusing anyone of a 'retribution campaign.'"
Brennan's lawsuit focused on two investigations. One centered on an alleged conspiracy to deprive Trump of his rights by probing alleged Russian interference. Another was related to statements he made to Congress regarding an intelligence community assessment of Russian influence during the election.
Brennan's legal team said Justice Department officials have "taken steps that clearly violate well-established norms and limitations on prosecutorial conduct" as part of the Trump administration's investigations.
"Those overreaching actions have violated Director Brennan's constitutional rights and will serve as the basis for challenges to any resulting charges, including motions to dismiss any indictment on the grounds that it is the result of selective and vindictive prosecution," they wrote.
The lawsuit noted that the examination of prosecutors' emails, texts, and other communications would allow the courts to determine if decisions were based on legitimate law enforcement concerns or an effort to "selectively" and "vindictively" prosecute the former CIA director.
"There is a very real risk, however, that some of these materials and communications will no longer exist by the time any such challenges are filed and the court hears them," the lawsuit stated.
Brennan's legal team cited technology changes that it said do not ensure the routine preservation of communications and "ample evidence in the public record" of Trump administration officials failing to meet legal obligations to preserve records as the two reasons for its concern.
The lawsuit said the Trump administration is obligated to preserve records and evidence that would be relevant in a potential challenge if Brennan were indicted. Brennan's legal team pointed to both the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act as regulations covering many of the communications and materials involved in the two investigations.
Brennan was previously referred for criminal prosecution by the House Judiciary Committee over his connection with an investigation that was launched in 2016 into suspected Russian influence on Trump's presidential campaign. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in October 2025 that Brennan allegedly "knowingly made false statements during his transcribed interview" in May 2023 and that his testimony on the 2016 investigation into Trump included "numerous willfully and intentionally false statements of material fact."
In the House Judiciary Committee's criminal referral, Jordan wrote, "Brennan falsely denied that the CIA relied on the discredited Steele dossier in drafting the post-election Intelligence Community Assessment."
Brennan previously accused the Trump administration in December of attempting to judge shop, a practice used to file a lawsuit in a court with a judge likely to give a favorable ruling. The former CIA director asked U.S. Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga of the Southern District of Florida to prevent U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who dismissed the classified documents case against Trump in 2024, from being involved in future proceedings.
You May Also Like
Elon Musk trial on track as Washington securities case
Egrag Crypto to XRP Investors: You’re Either Early Or You’re Exit Liquidity
