The Justice Department reassigned the lead federal prosecutor overseeing its investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan in South Florida, two sources familiar with the matter said Friday.
Maria Medetis Long, a career prosecutor based in Miami who had been leading the case for months, is no longer handling the investigation, the sources confirmed to the Washington Examiner. A person familiar with the matter said only that Long would not be leading the case moving forward, adding that the circumstances surrounding the shift were not immediately known.
The development was first reported by CNN, which cited sources who suggested the move came after internal disagreements over the strength and timing of potential charges. However, a DOJ spokesperson pushed back on that characterization in a statement to the Washington Examiner, while not denying that Long was no longer handling the case.
“CNN reached out to us less than an hour before publishing its story,” a DOJ spokesperson said. “As we would have told CNN, as a matter of routine practice, attorneys are moved around on cases so offices can most effectively allocate resources. It is completely healthy and normal to change members of legal teams.”
The spokesperson did not address specific details about Long’s departure from the case, or whether her swap from the case stemmed from any frustrations by President Donald Trump or leadership of the DOJ, like the recently-appointed Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
The federal investigation, being handled by the U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones’s Office in Miami, has been underway for months and is examining, among other things, whether Brennan made false statements to Congress related to the 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference.
According to an exclusive report one day before by Reuters, the investigation has recently accelerated, with federal agents planning to interview roughly a half-dozen witnesses, including former intelligence officials involved in drafting the 2017 assessment. Investigators have already conducted some interviews and issued multiple rounds of subpoenas seeking documents and testimony tied to the origins of the Trump-Russia inquiry.
That assessment concluded that Russia sought to influence the 2016 election specifically to help Trump. Recently declassified documents, however, show that conclusion was shaped by flawed sourcing and politicized analysis. Critics have pointed in particular to the inclusion of material tied to the discredited Steele dossier, which was financially backed by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, as well as internal disagreements among officials at the time over how strongly to characterize Moscow’s intent, given that intelligence agencies had little to no evidence that Russia wanted to boost Trump.
The Brennan inquiry appears to center in part on his more recent congressional testimony, including statements made in 2023 to the House Judiciary Committee. The referral that helped spark the investigation came from Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who alleged Brennan provided false or misleading testimony regarding the Steele dossier and the development of the intelligence assessment.
Brennan has denied wrongdoing and previously criticized the investigation as politically driven. His attorney has argued there is no legal basis for charges and accused prosecutors of using improper tactics.
The case has drawn heightened attention amid broader shifts inside the Justice Department following Trump’s recent firing of former Attorney General Pam Bondi. Blanche, Trump’s former personal attorney who previously served as Bondi’s deputy, has since taken a more direct role in overseeing high-profile investigations.
Blanche has also reportedly been involved in internal meetings reviewing the progress of the Brennan investigation in recent weeks, as the administration pushes forward on cases tied to the Russia investigation, according to Reuters.
At the same time, legal hurdles remain. A potential prosecution could face jurisdictional challenges, particularly because Brennan’s testimony occurred in Washington, D.C., rather than Florida, where the investigation is currently based.
Separately, these developments came during the same week that newly declassified transcripts revealed that the intelligence community whistleblower whose complaint triggered Trump’s first impeachment had prior contact with congressional Democrats before filing the allegation — a detail that was not disclosed on the original complaint form. The records shed new light on the role of former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson in advancing the complaint to Congress.
GRAND CONSPIRACY INVESTIGATION INTO OBAMA-ERA OFFICIALS GAINS STEAM IN SOUTH FLORIDA
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, now led by Tulsi Gabbard, also confirmed to the Washington Examiner this week it sent criminal referrals to the DOJ involving both Atkinson and the whistleblower.
While the DOJ has not publicly detailed the scope of those referrals, the developments underscore a widening effort by Trump-era officials and allies to revisit key decisions made by intelligence agencies during and after the 2016 election.