Maria Medetis Long, the career federal prosecutor leading the criminal investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan in Miami, has been removed from the case, multiple sources confirmed Friday. Her departure followed her assessment to U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones that evidence was insufficient for charges. Chris DeLorenz, a former law clerk for U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, now joins the prosecution team, marking a significant shift in the long-running inquiry.
Chris DeLorenz, a former law clerk for U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, has joined the legal team now overseeing the federal criminal investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan. DeLorenz recently transitioned from an advisory role in the Deputy Attorney General's office in Washington to serve as an assistant U.S.
His involvement follows the abrupt removal of Maria Medetis Long, the head of the national security section for the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of Florida, from the high-profile case. Medetis Long informed lawyers representing clients involved in the matter late last week that she was no longer assigned. She did not provide a specific reason for her reassignment.
However, a source familiar with the situation indicated to CBS News that her removal came after she communicated to U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones her belief that insufficient evidence existed to build a viable case. This development places the future direction of the investigation under scrutiny.
The Justice Department confirmed the personnel change. "It is completely healthy and normal to change members of legal teams," a department spokesperson stated, describing the shift as routine practice for resource allocation. Strip away the noise and the story is simpler than it looks. A prosecutor assessed the available evidence and concluded it did not meet the threshold for charges.
This internal determination, common in complex investigations, often leads to case closure or reassignment. Here, it led to a new prosecutor. The probe itself originated from a referral by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee last October.
Chairman Jim Jordan alleged that Brennan falsely denied the CIA's reliance on the Steele dossier during the drafting of the intelligence assessment into Russia's 2016 election interference. Jordan claimed Brennan also falsely told the committee the CIA had opposed including the dossier in the assessment. These are serious accusations.
The so-called Steele dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, contained various allegations against then-candidate Donald Trump. Many of these allegations have not been verified by U.S. intelligence agencies. The referral from the House Judiciary Committee effectively reignited scrutiny of Brennan's past statements.
This move by the committee underscores a continued effort by some Republican lawmakers to investigate intelligence activities related to the 2016 election. The focus is on potential perjury. Federal prosecutors and FBI agents are preparing to interview a former CIA official in early May as part of this ongoing investigation.
This individual is considered a witness, not a target. They have been interviewed more than once previously. The questions have centered on the decision to incorporate the Steele dossier into an annex of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA).
This assessment detailed Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. The witness was also asked about disagreements among CIA officials with Brennan over the Obama administration's conclusions that Russia's meddling aimed to assist Donald Trump and harm Hillary Clinton. These events occurred in 2016.
Here is the number that matters: 2023. While the underlying events being questioned took place in 2016, prosecutors are not directly investigating those actions due to the statute of limitations. Perjury charges carry their own distinct legal framework and evidentiary requirements.
This distinction is crucial. Proving a lie under oath requires a different set of facts than proving the original alleged misdeeds. attorney's office in Miami also handles a separate referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. She claimed, without presenting evidence, that Brennan and other Obama-era officials "manufactured" the 2017 assessment.
The status of that particular probe remains unclear. It adds another layer to the complex legal landscape surrounding intelligence officials from the previous administration. The office is also reviewing documents related to former special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into President Trump, further indicating its involvement in politically sensitive cases.
This shift in legal counsel for the Brennan investigation carries several implications. It could signal a renewed push to advance the probe, especially after Medetis Long's reported assessment that the case lacked sufficient evidence. The involvement of DeLorenz, with his background, could be interpreted in various ways.
His previous role as a law clerk for Judge Cannon, who presided over aspects of the Trump classified records investigation, places him in a specific legal context. The market is telling you something. Listen.
The legal system, especially in politically charged cases, often signals shifts in approach through personnel changes. For the public, the broader significance lies in the perception of justice. The independence of the Justice Department is a frequent subject of debate, particularly when investigations touch on high-ranking former government officials or politically sensitive topics.
Any perceived political influence on prosecutorial decisions can erode public trust in legal institutions. This case tests the line between legitimate inquiry and politically motivated prosecution. It highlights the challenges faced by career prosecutors navigating such complex terrains.
The outcome will shape public confidence in the fairness and impartiality of federal investigations. - The lead federal prosecutor in the John Brennan investigation, Maria Medetis Long, was removed after advising insufficient evidence for charges. - Chris DeLorenz, with a background including a clerkship for Judge Aileen Cannon, has been assigned to the case. - The probe centers on allegations that Brennan committed perjury during his 2023 testimony to Congress regarding the Steele dossier and the 2016 intelligence assessment. - An upcoming interview with a former CIA official in early May will focus on the inclusion of the Steele dossier in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. The immediate future of the investigation hinges on the work of the newly assigned team and the forthcoming witness interview. Observers will watch closely for any indication of a shift in strategy or intensity from Chris DeLorenz and his colleagues.
The ultimate decision on whether to pursue charges against John Brennan will directly reflect the evidentiary threshold met by the new team. This outcome will undoubtedly influence ongoing political narratives surrounding the Justice Department and intelligence community oversight. Public statements from the House Judiciary Committee, particularly from Chairman Jim Jordan, are also anticipated following these developments, potentially adding further political pressure to the legal process.
Key Takeaways
— - The lead federal prosecutor in the John Brennan investigation, Maria Medetis Long, was removed after advising insufficient evidence for charges.
— - Chris DeLorenz, with a background including a clerkship for Judge Aileen Cannon, has been assigned to the case.
— - The probe centers on allegations that Brennan committed perjury during his 2023 testimony to Congress regarding the Steele dossier and the 2016 intelligence assessment.
— - An upcoming interview with a former CIA official in early May will focus on the inclusion of the Steele dossier in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.
Source: CBS News