- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
DOJ subpoenas (suddenly) withdrawn in John Brennan investigation after Joe diGenova joins
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:10 pm
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:10 pm
quote:
In a reversal, prosecutors who are trying to establish a perjury case against John O. Brennan, the former C.I.A. director, have rescinded subpoenas issued just days ago that had required witnesses to testify before a grand jury in Washington, according to people familiar with the matter.
The withdrawal on Monday night of the subpoenas, which the Justice Department had issued over the weekend, was a shaky start for a new phase of the investigation. The department last week removed a career prosecutor who had been overseeing the matter, Maria Medetis Long, who was said to have objected to moving forward with it.
The department brought in an outspoken Trump loyalist, Joseph diGenova, 81, to take over the inquiry into Mr. Brennan, which is part of a larger effort to investigate former officials who have scrutinized President Trump. Mr. diGenova was formally sworn in on Monday morning, and it is not clear whether he played a role in the issuing of the subpoenas over the weekend.
Justice Department officials on Monday did not explain the reason for the change of plans when informing lawyers for the witnesses, according to the people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.
Advertisement
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/21/us/politics/justice-dept-john-brennan-subpoenas.html?unlocked_article_code=1.dFA.joOU.iDGXaqhsqwMS&smid=url-share
7
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:11 pm to loogaroo
quote:
before a grand jury in Washington
Found the likely problem
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:23 pm to loogaroo
Sometimes you want to get the documents before you get a witness on the record. Maybe they’re trying to get whatever they want from Congress first.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:27 pm to boosiebadazz
Also, is any part of this inaccurate or reported wrong?
quote:
The Brennan matter is focused on statements the former C.I.A. director made during a 2023 deposition to Congress about the relationship between the 2017 assessment and the Steele dossier, a compendium of later-discredited political opposition research about Mr. Trump and Russia.
The F.B.I. had wanted to include information from the dossier in the assessment, but C.I.A. analysts balked because its sourcing was unknown. Mr. Brennan told lawmakers that “the C.I.A. was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the intelligence community assessment.” Ultimately, as a compromise, a summary of the dossier was attached to the assessment as an appendix, as Mr. Brennan had long said.
Documents the Trump administration declassified last summer showed that C.I.A. analysts also objected to including the information in an appendix, too, but portrayed Mr. Brennan as pushing back in support of the compromise. Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio and a Trump ally, made a criminal referral, arguing that Mr. Brennan’s testimony about C.I.A. opposition was a false statement. Mr. Brennan’s lawyer, Kenneth L. Wainstein, has said it was not.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:27 pm to boosiebadazz
We’re all waiting for the first indictment against……anybody.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:32 pm to loogaroo
Newsmax reported this this morning. It said Digenova called off subpoenas and instead is taking volunteer witnesses.
It made no sense so I didn't post the article as it was frankly too depressing and unexplainable.
It made no sense so I didn't post the article as it was frankly too depressing and unexplainable.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:38 pm to boosiebadazz
Yes. The entire 2nd paragraph is not true. Not only did the dossier material appear in the main body, Brennan overruled analysts that said it shouldn't be entered, gave the infamous quote, "yes, but doesn't it ring true?" When pressed on inclusion
He also only used a select group of analysts leading up to the ICA. Ruling out dissent.
All of this is covered in the July declassified documents .
The NYT "reporter" linked by OP is top 10 Russian collusion truthers.
Brennan defense team has been fairly aggressive in their media approach. Guess that's probably a good approach?
He also only used a select group of analysts leading up to the ICA. Ruling out dissent.
All of this is covered in the July declassified documents .
The NYT "reporter" linked by OP is top 10 Russian collusion truthers.
Brennan defense team has been fairly aggressive in their media approach. Guess that's probably a good approach?
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:38 pm to cajunangelle
Wonder if some holdouts poisoned the well by deliberately jacking up the subpoenas somehow.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:39 pm to VOR
I mean DeGenova is absolutely going to indict someone. It’s the sole reason he was the replacement.
The question will be if the indictment survives pre-trial motion practice up and down the appellate courts (and maybe SCOTUS).
The question will be if the indictment survives pre-trial motion practice up and down the appellate courts (and maybe SCOTUS).
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:42 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Maybe they’re trying to get whatever they want from Congress first.
I think this is what is happening.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:43 pm to loogaroo
For what it's worth. This Is from thehill.
quote:
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has withdrawn subpoenas related to the investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan, The Associated Press reported on Tuesday.
While the DOJ issued a small handful of subpoenas over the weekend for witnesses to appear before a grand jury in Washington, D.C., investigators informed lawyers on Monday evening that those were being withdrawn in favor of voluntary interview requests, according to the AP, which cited two people familiar with the matter.
A spokesperson for the DOJ declined to comment on strategy related to the investigation and said that the development has “no bearing” on the strength of the case.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:43 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
mean DeGenova is absolutely going to indict someone. It’s the sole reason he was the replacement.
Absolutely he is. He's been saying people need to be drug out in the street and shot over what has happened. It's coming.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:45 pm to VOR
quote:
We’re all waiting for the first indictment against……anybody.
Withdrawn. But this is the first round old man. Hide and watch. This is not over.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:47 pm to cajunangelle
Sometimes you want a voluntary interview so you know what a witness is going to say. If you subpoena them, you’re finding out what they’re going to say just as the GJ is.
If they have something exculpatory for the target, you want to know about that in a voluntary interview instead of in front of a GJ.
I hire an investigator to talk to non-party witnesses all the time before putting them under oath in a deposition.
If they have something exculpatory for the target, you want to know about that in a voluntary interview instead of in front of a GJ.
I hire an investigator to talk to non-party witnesses all the time before putting them under oath in a deposition.
This post was edited on 4/22/26 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:49 pm to VOR
quote:
VOR
If you could be indicted for stupidity, you'd hold records like Pete Maravich.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:50 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
hire an investigator to talk to non-party witnesses all the time before putting them under oath in a deposition.
Maybe you should work for the Trump Admistration?
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:50 pm to boosiebadazz
This makes sense. And he also needs to tell Thune that if he doesn't supply the documents the DoJ needs immediately that he will be charged with obstruction of justice.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:51 pm to KingOrange
eh, I’m not their type. Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:53 pm to boosiebadazz
Trump seems to prefer smoking hot females and dudes that look and sound like they stepped out of a Sicilian crime family.
Posted on 4/22/26 at 8:53 pm to AlterEd
quote:
Trump seems to prefer smoking hot females and dudes that look and sound like they stepped out of a Sicilian crime family.
And bonus points if they’re incompetent sycophants
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News