The Justice Department’s probe into a purported “grand conspiracy” against President Trump presses ahead after special prosecutor Joe diGenova left the post without filing charges. Investigators have issued subpoenas to former intelligence and FBI officials — including John Brennan and James Clapper — and expect grand jury testimony soon in Fort Pierce, Florida. The inquiry seeks to connect separate probes (Russia 2016 and Mar-a-Lago documents) into a broader conspiracy, a task critics call legally and factually difficult amid staff turnover and White House pressure.
Justice Department’s 'Grand Conspiracy' Probe Continues With Subpoenas After DiGenova’s Exit
FILE - This image, contained in the indictment against former President Donald Trump, shows boxes of records stored in a bathroom and shower in the Lake Room at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla. (Justice Department via AP)(Justice Department via AP)
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department’s high-profile inquiry into an alleged “grand conspiracy” against President Donald Trump is continuing despite the abrupt departure of special prosecutor Joe diGenova, who left the post after five months without filing any charges.
Officials say a new round of subpoenas to former law enforcement and intelligence officials is expected to produce grand jury testimony in the coming weeks in Fort Pierce, Florida — the courthouse of a Trump-appointed federal judge that the department selected as the probe’s venue.
Uncertain Path to Charges
Whether the investigation will yield indictments — and who, if anyone, might be charged — remains unclear. Prosecutors face legal obstacles, significant personnel turnover and mounting pressure from a White House frustrated by more than a year of starts and stops.
FILE - Former CIA Director John Brennan testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 23, 2017, before the House Intelligence Committee Russia Investigation Task Force. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
The inquiry aims to knit together several separate probes — including the FBI’s Russia investigation and the probe into classified documents at Mar-a-Lago — into a single narrative alleging a coordinated effort by government officials to target Trump. Critics and some former prosecutors say stitching those disparate inquiries into one criminal conspiracy is legally and factually challenging.
“The idea of connecting all those different investigations into one single conspiracy, there's no basis for that,” said retired federal prosecutor Randall Eliason. “And there's no basis for an allegation that any one of them was actually a criminal act against Trump. They've all been verified and upheld in one way or another.”
Leadership, Staffing And Controversy
DiGenova, 81, a former Reagan administration prosecutor and outspoken proponent of a "deep state" theory, was appointed in April. His tenure drew scrutiny because of past inflammatory remarks; in 2020 he apologized after saying a cybersecurity official who vouched for the 2020 election results should be “drawn and quartered.” He denied that his recent comments to the press were meant to discourage careful prosecution, saying the cases “take time” to build.
His appointment and departure came amid other staffing changes: a senior national security prosecutor, Maria Medetis Long, was removed from the team after raising concerns about the handling of an inquiry into former CIA Director John Brennan. Brennan’s lawyers have seized on such departures to argue that career prosecutors who were unpersuaded by the available evidence have been sidelined.
President Donald Trump speaks during an event about healthcare in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday Sept. 18, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Although the department has not announced a successor to diGenova, a team remains on the case, including attorneys like Kurt Olsen. Investigators have issued subpoenas or sought testimony from a wide array of former officials tied to the Russia probe, including ex-National Intelligence Director James Clapper and Brennan, who was reportedly summoned to appear before the grand jury on Oct. 15.
Origins And Stakes
The probe grew from longstanding presidential complaints about a 2016 intelligence assessment that found Russia interfered to benefit Trump and from frustration with prior reviews that found errors by FBI agents but no evidence of a coordinated anti-Trump conspiracy. A 2019 special counsel report documented extensive Russian interference but concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign.
Supporters of the investigation argue it is a necessary review of potential misconduct by officials who handled those earlier inquiries. Critics counter that repeated reviews have not produced proof of criminal wrongdoing and say the current probe risks being driven by politics rather than facts.
With subpoenas being served and grand jury activity anticipated, the investigation is poised to continue — even as its ultimate direction and legal viability remain in doubt.
Key developments to watch: whether the grand jury returns indictments, who the targets might be, and whether the probe withstands legal challenges alleging vindictive or politically motivated prosecution.
Help us improve.
