Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche says Trump investigation staff fired or resigned

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Thursday that every Justice Department or FBI employee who worked on criminal investigations into President Donald Trump has been fired, resigned, or took early retirement.

Objective Facts

Every Justice Department or FBI employee who worked on the criminal investigations into President Donald Trump has been fired, resigned, or took early retirement, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Thursday. Blanche said during a fireside chat at CPAC that "There is not a single man or woman at the Department of Justice who had anything to do with those prosecutions," and at the Justice Department, that number amounts to "over 200" people. FBI Director Kash Patel fired a dozen employees involved in the classified documents investigation as part of a wider internal investigation into actions taken in Jack Smith's investigation. In some cases, the employees received termination letters that said they couldn't be "trusted" to "faithfully" implement Trump's agenda because of their involvement in his prosecutions. Two unnamed agents sued the bureau last week, arguing they were fired despite exemplary performance records because they had been assigned to work on cases involving the president.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Left-leaning outlets and critics characterized Blanche's remarks as a troubling boast about systematic purging of DOJ and FBI officials. Blanche, described as Trump's former personal attorney now serving as the number two official at the Justice Department, publicly boasted the administration has purged federal employees from the DOJ and FBI involved in investigating Trump, declaring that Director Patel has "cleaned house" at the FBI. Legal experts and observers condemned Blanche's statements as evidence of authoritarian governance, with anti-Trump national security lawyer Mark Zaid announcing he would use Blanche's remarks as evidence in ongoing litigation challenging the unlawful political firing of federal employees. Left-leaning critics emphasized constitutional and rule-of-law concerns. Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance stated "Firing prosecutors because of cases they were assigned to work on is just unacceptable," calling it "anti-rule of law; it's anti-democracy." A former Justice Department employee said "The way in which these employees have been terminated seems like a pretty clear violation of the Civil Service Protection Act and general constitutional due process protections." Mike Gordon, fired from DOJ after prosecuting the biggest January 6 cases, said "This is just essentially public corruption." The left frames this as evidence of a broader pattern dismantling institutional safeguards. The Brennan Center reports that since January 20, the second Trump administration has systematically dismantled the DOJ's internal controls that help ensure compliance with professional and ethical standards, with courts grappling with consequences as the DOJ presents questionable legal positions. Critics note that no evidence has surfaced publicly that anyone connected with Jack Smith's investigations was motivated by partisan bias against Trump or was influenced by Biden political appointees.

Right-Leaning Perspective

Right-leaning outlets and Blanche himself framed the personnel actions as necessary correction of institutional bias. Blanche argued that "what happened for the past four years was so bad and so awful," with a "big part of that" being "what happened with the Department of Justice and the FBI and the weaponization that we saw." Blanche emphasized that President Trump has said, 'I am the president, and if you work in the executive branch, you work for me.' Right-wing commentary treated Blanche's statements as justified corrective action. RedState's coverage noted that Blanche blamed "past administrations, Republicans included, who chose not to challenge the Deep State and blithely accepted the status quo," with Blanche stating "past administrations have just resigned themselves to putting up with partisan actors within the Department of Justice. We do not." The outlet quoted Blanche saying "Director Patel has cleaned house there too," stating "There isn't a single man or woman with a gun, federal agent still in that organization that had anything to do with the prosecutions." Right-leaning outlets presented the removals as restoring institutional independence. Bloomberg Government reported that more than 200 people involved in Trump prosecutions have either left or were forced to leave the department, with Blanche pushing back on critics who said the DOJ has moved slowly to go after Trump opponents. The framing emphasizes that these were necessary steps to end what they characterize as partisan misuse of the DOJ.

Deep Dive

Since the second Trump administration began, the Justice Department and FBI have gutted several offices whose work touched on high-profile cases, including the two prosecutions of Trump led by former special counsel Jack Smith, both of which were dropped before Trump returned to office in January 2025. The staffing changes represent a marked departure from historical norms: rank-and-file prosecutors by tradition remain with the department across presidential administrations and are not punished by virtue of their involvement in sensitive investigations. What each perspective captures and what it obscures: The left correctly identifies that the removals are unprecedented in scope and explicitly tied to prior involvement in Trump investigations—the letters to fired employees specifically cited their roles in investigating Trump—raising genuine constitutional questions. However, the left provides limited engagement with the Trump administration's stated rationale about institutional reform and restoring DOJ independence from perceived political weaponization during the Biden administration. The right, conversely, frames the removals as necessary correction of real institutional problems, but largely avoids directly addressing the constitutional and rule-of-law concerns raised by removing career employees explicitly because of their prior prosecutorial duties. CNN has not independently verified Blanche's claim of "over 200" departures. Critical questions remain unresolved: The Justice Department and FBI have not publicly detailed the full scope of staffing changes referenced by Blanche. The lawsuits now in motion will test whether such removals violate constitutional due process and statutory civil service protections. Additionally, the Trump DOJ has faced repeated defeats in court on other staffing matters, with Bondi and Blanche floundering in court as losses piled up on their aggressive assertions of executive power. The institutional implications are significant: The mass departures have cost the DOJ "generations of institutional knowledge it may never get back," according to advocates for displaced employees.

OBJ SPEAKING

← Daily BriefAbout

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche says Trump investigation staff fired or resigned

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Thursday that every Justice Department or FBI employee who worked on criminal investigations into President Donald Trump has been fired, resigned, or took early retirement.

Mar 26, 2026· Updated Mar 27, 2026
What's Going On

Every Justice Department or FBI employee who worked on the criminal investigations into President Donald Trump has been fired, resigned, or took early retirement, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Thursday. Blanche said during a fireside chat at CPAC that "There is not a single man or woman at the Department of Justice who had anything to do with those prosecutions," and at the Justice Department, that number amounts to "over 200" people. FBI Director Kash Patel fired a dozen employees involved in the classified documents investigation as part of a wider internal investigation into actions taken in Jack Smith's investigation. In some cases, the employees received termination letters that said they couldn't be "trusted" to "faithfully" implement Trump's agenda because of their involvement in his prosecutions. Two unnamed agents sued the bureau last week, arguing they were fired despite exemplary performance records because they had been assigned to work on cases involving the president.

Left says: Critics characterize Blanche as Trump's former personal attorney who publicly boasted the administration has purged federal employees from the DOJ and FBI, with Blanche declaring that Director Patel has "cleaned house" at the FBI, removing every agent with any connection to Trump's prosecution. Critics describe this as confirmation of an authoritarian takeover in which the Justice Department and intelligence agencies serve only the president's personal interests rather than the American people or the rule of law.
Right says: Blanche argued that "what happened for the past four years was so bad and so awful," with "weaponization" of the Department of Justice and FBI, and that "the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, President Trump, and myself, we are changing things." Blanche stated that President Trump has said, 'I am the president, and if you work in the executive branch, you work for me.'
✓ Common Ground
Both sides acknowledge that over 200 DOJ employees have departed through some combination of firings, resignations, and early retirements related to their work on Trump investigations.
Both sides acknowledge that FBI Director Kash Patel has removed agents who worked on Trump prosecutions, with Blanche stating "Director Patel has cleaned house there too."
There is agreement that federal employees have filed lawsuits, with two unnamed agents suing the bureau last week and two former FBI agents filing a lawsuit alleging wrongful termination after being dismissed for their roles in investigations.
Both perspectives acknowledge that the Trump administration has taken definitive action on DOJ staffing, though they fundamentally disagree on whether such actions are appropriate institutional reform or unlawful retaliation.
Objective Deep Dive

Since the second Trump administration began, the Justice Department and FBI have gutted several offices whose work touched on high-profile cases, including the two prosecutions of Trump led by former special counsel Jack Smith, both of which were dropped before Trump returned to office in January 2025. The staffing changes represent a marked departure from historical norms: rank-and-file prosecutors by tradition remain with the department across presidential administrations and are not punished by virtue of their involvement in sensitive investigations.

What each perspective captures and what it obscures: The left correctly identifies that the removals are unprecedented in scope and explicitly tied to prior involvement in Trump investigations—the letters to fired employees specifically cited their roles in investigating Trump—raising genuine constitutional questions. However, the left provides limited engagement with the Trump administration's stated rationale about institutional reform and restoring DOJ independence from perceived political weaponization during the Biden administration. The right, conversely, frames the removals as necessary correction of real institutional problems, but largely avoids directly addressing the constitutional and rule-of-law concerns raised by removing career employees explicitly because of their prior prosecutorial duties. CNN has not independently verified Blanche's claim of "over 200" departures.

Critical questions remain unresolved: The Justice Department and FBI have not publicly detailed the full scope of staffing changes referenced by Blanche. The lawsuits now in motion will test whether such removals violate constitutional due process and statutory civil service protections. Additionally, the Trump DOJ has faced repeated defeats in court on other staffing matters, with Bondi and Blanche floundering in court as losses piled up on their aggressive assertions of executive power. The institutional implications are significant: The mass departures have cost the DOJ "generations of institutional knowledge it may never get back," according to advocates for displaced employees.

◈ Tone Comparison

The two sides employ starkly different rhetorical frames. The left uses terms like "purged," "publicly boasted," and "politically motivated purges" that emphasize abuse of power, while the right uses "cleaned house" and appeals to presidential constitutional authority that frame actions as institutional correction. Left-leaning outlets treat Blanche's statements as troubling admissions of political retaliation; right-leaning outlets present them as justified defense of executive prerogative.

✕ Key Disagreements
Constitutional Authority and Presidential Power
Left: Critics argue that firing prosecutors because of cases they were assigned to work on is unconstitutional and "anti-rule of law; it's anti-democracy." Opponents contend the terminations violate the Civil Service Protection Act and general constitutional due process protections.
Right: The Trump administration and Blanche assert that the president has clear authority to remove executive branch employees, stating "I am the president, and if you work in the executive branch, you work for me."
Justification for Personnel Removals
Left: Critics characterize these actions as "politically motivated purges designed to eliminate officials based on their prior duties investigating the president." Critics note that no evidence has surfaced publicly that anyone connected with Smith's investigations was motivated by partisan bias against Trump.
Right: Blanche and allies argue that "what happened for the past four years was so bad and so awful," attributing this to "weaponization" of the DOJ and FBI that required systematic correction.
Institutional Independence vs. Political Loyalty
Left: Critics emphasize that the DOJ's nonpartisan career workforce, developed over decades, has played an important role in limiting partisan misuse of the department's authorities.
Right: Blanche asserted that employees in the executive branch must demonstrate absolute loyalty to the sitting president.