Justice Department Moves Closer To Compelling Testimony & Records In The Investigation Of The Former CIA Director’s Role In The 2016 Russia Intelligence Assessment

Friday, November 7, 2025, 8:45 A.M. ET. 3 Minute Read, By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Englebrook Independent News,

WASHINGTON, DC.- The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is preparing to issue grand-jury subpoenas in its criminal investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan, according to multiple reports citing officials familiar with the matter. The move signals an escalation in the DOJ’s probe examining Brennan’s role in the 2016 intelligence assessment that concluded Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential election to benefit Donald J. Trump.

      According to published accounts, prosecutors are expected to seek documents, emails, and communications connected to the drafting of the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, which became a cornerstone of the Russia-interference narrative. While it is not yet clear whether the subpoenas have been formally issued, sources say they could be served within days.

Expanding Investigation;

     The ongoing investigation, led by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, reportedly extends beyond Brennan to include other former intelligence officials who participated in the assessment. The effort follows a July 2025 DOJ confirmation that both Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey were under criminal scrutiny for possible misconduct tied to the Russia investigation.

     In October, the House Judiciary Committee formally referred Brennan for criminal prosecution, alleging he made false statements to Congress about the use of the so-called “Steele dossier” in the intelligence community’s findings. That dossier, compiled by a former British intelligence officer, was later discredited in significant part but played a role in early investigations of Trump campaign associates.

What Prosecutors Are Seeking;

     Reports indicate that the anticipated subpoenas will target internal CIA materials, analytic drafts, and communications among senior intelligence officials. The DOJ is said to be building a comprehensive evidentiary record for potential charges, should prosecutors conclude that Brennan or others misled oversight authorities or misrepresented intelligence conclusions.

     U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quinones, who is supervising the case, has publicly stated that the Justice Department aims to restore public trust in the impartial enforcement of the law and remove political bias from investigative decisions.

Brennan’s Response;

     John Brennan has previously denied any wrongdoing and maintains that his actions during and after the 2016 election were lawful and within the scope of his duties. He has also called the investigation politically motivated and said he has not been notified of any formal charges. His legal counsel did not respond to inquiries regarding the latest reports of subpoena preparations.

Broader Implications;

     Legal experts caution that the issuance of subpoenas does not necessarily indicate imminent indictments. However, such a move would suggest that prosecutors have advanced the case to a more formal evidentiary phase. If charges are ultimately filed, it would mark one of the rare instances of a criminal case against a former senior intelligence official over analytical and oversight conduct, rather than operational wrongdoing.

     The probe has already sparked political division, with critics arguing that Brennan’s actions politicized intelligence work, while others warn that the investigation itself risks weaponizing the Justice Department.

Editor’s Note:

All information contained in this article is based on verified reporting from Reuters (November 6, 2025), The Washington Post (July 9, 2025), and official statements from the U.S. Department of Justice and the House Judiciary Committee. Additional background was drawn from public congressional records and the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. The DOJ declined to comment, citing grand-jury secrecy laws. All sources were cross-referenced for accuracy and context by the Englebrook Independent News editorial staff.