Explosive new developments have emerged in Washington as former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey face criminal investigations over their roles in the 2016 Trump-Russia collusion probe.

According to the New York Post, the FBI has launched separate criminal investigations into both former intelligence chiefs following referrals from current CIA Director John Ratcliffe. The investigation into Brennan centers on allegations that he made false statements to Congress regarding the inclusion of the controversial Steele dossier in intelligence assessments.

Department of Justice sources described the FBI's view of Brennan and Comey's conduct during the Trump-Russia investigation as a "conspiracy." The criminal probe comes just one week after the CIA released a scathing "lessons-learned review" that criticized the rushed and unconventional process used to assess Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Key Intelligence Officials Face Serious Accusations

The criminal referral involving Brennan specifically focuses on his congressional testimony about the Steele dossier's role in the intelligence community's assessment. Sources indicate that Brennan may have committed perjury when he claimed under oath that the dossier "wasn't part of the corpus of intelligence information" used in their analysis.

Current CIA Director Ratcliffe provided evidence suggesting that Brennan had actually insisted on including the Steele dossier in the final report, despite strong objections from the CIA's top Russia experts. These experts warned that the dossier "did not meet even the most basic tradecraft standards."

The investigation has revealed emails showing Brennan formally pushed for the dossier's inclusion, writing that "my bottom line is that I believe that the information warrants inclusion in the report." This directive came despite warnings from another CIA official that it could compromise "the credibility of the entire paper."

Timeline Raises Questions of Political Motivation

The CIA's internal review highlighted concerns about the rushed timeline to publish both classified and unclassified versions before the presidential transition. Investigators are examining whether this accelerated schedule indicated potential political motives behind the assessment.

The report criticized the exclusion of key intelligence agencies and suggested that media leaks may have influenced analysts to conform to a predetermined narrative of Trump-Russia collusion. This unusual process involved Brennan, Comey, and then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper being "excessively involved" in drafting the assessment.

The investigation has uncovered that the Steele dossier, which played a central role in the controversy, was funded by Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. They paid over $1 million to the Perkins Coie law firm, which then hired Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Trump.

Conflicting Testimonies Draw Scrutiny

Brennan's testimony to Congress has shown significant inconsistencies over time. In May 2017, he claimed under oath that the Steele dossier was not used as a basis for the Intelligence Community Assessment.

Six years later, in May 2023, Brennan changed his story during closed-door testimony to the House Judiciary Committee. He claimed that the CIA strongly opposed including any reference to the Steele dossier in the assessment, contradicting earlier evidence of his written support for its inclusion.

The FBI's investigation into Comey remains more closely guarded, with sources not yet revealing the specific nature of potential criminal matters. However, DOJ sources indicate it relates to his role in pushing for the dossier's inclusion throughout the main body of the intelligence assessment.

Why this story matters

This investigation strikes at the heart of America's intelligence community, revealing concerns about potential misuse of power at the highest levels. It raises lasting questions about how political narratives intersect with national security assessments.

Additionally, it underscores how misinformation—even within government agencies—can spread and be relied upon, with serious implications for public trust and policy. As criminal probes continue, the public deserves transparency about how their democracy is maintained—or manipulated—by those in power.

In conclusion, federal investigations are underway into former intelligence leaders John Brennan and James Comey for their roles in managing the 2016 Trump-Russia intelligence findings. Central to Brennan’s case are statements to Congress and his support for including the controversial Steele dossier, which internal CIA warnings deemed unreliable. Comey’s case remains less defined publicly, though Justice Department officials have linked him to broader concerns about the dossier’s use and influence over key assessments.