Judge tosses Brennan suit demanding preservation of records in ‘grand conspiracy’ probe

A federal judge on Thursday agreed to toss a lawsuit from former CIA Director John Brennan, arguing he did not yet have standing to sue over an investigation targeting him for his role in reviewing the 2016 election.

Brennan brought the suit in July, seeking to compel the Department of Justice (DOJ) to preserve records related to the investigation, saying they would be needed for an expected vindictive prosecution filing if an indictment was brought.

But U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb said the matter was not yet ripe, agreeing with the Trump administration to toss the suit.

“To have standing to seek forward-looking relief, a plaintiff must allege an injury that is ‘imminent,’ rather than one that is ‘conjectural or hypothetical,’” Cobb wrote.

The judge went on to call it “speculative whether Defendants are deleting records relevant to a future vindictive- or selective-prosecution defense.”

Still, Cobb offered up some scrutiny of her own on the investigation into Brennan, part of the so-called grand conspiracy probing a number of topics, including the past criminal investigations into President Trump.

“Unsurprisingly, Brennan does not believe that he has committed any crime. Much more surprising are Brennan’s allegations regarding DOJ officials who have not found otherwise, despite their alleged marching orders,” Cobb wrote, referencing one former member of the team who determined “that ‘the case against Director Brennan was too weak to bring.’”

She also noted the resignation of Joseph diGenova, who was later tapped to lead the conspiracy probe.

“Joseph diGenova—who had previously made public statements calling Brennan ‘evil’ and a ‘traitor,’ and had declared that the Grand Conspiracy ‘began with John Brennan and ends with John Brennan,’ —reportedly resigned from his position investigating Brennan’s cases and stated ‘if you want indictments where there’s no evidence, you have an ethical problem,’” Cobb wrote.

“One might think that these statements would lead to the termination of the investigations. Instead, Brennan alleges, it has led to the termination of the investigators.”