Second prosecutor resigns from Justice Department 'grand conspiracy' probe

A lawyer who previously backed false claims about the 2020 election has resigned from a Justice Department investigation examining whether former government officials conspired against President Trump, a person familiar with the matter said.

The departure of Kurt Olsen is the second high-profile exit from the so-called grand-conspiracy probe and comes weeks before the midterm elections. The investigation has pursued an expansive theory that multiple prior inquiries into Trump formed part of a coordinated effort to damage his political prospects.

The resignation

Olsen's exit follows the abrupt resignation earlier this month of a lead prosecutor on the same team. People familiar with the internal discussions said disagreements over the strength of the evidence and the proper scope of subpoenas contributed to the turnover.

The Justice Department has not publicly detailed the reasons for either resignation. A spokesperson declined to comment on personnel matters.

Scope of the probe

Investigators have focused on several major prior cases, including the inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election and the classified-documents case centered on Mar-a-Lago. They have sought testimony from officials involved in those probes in search of evidence of an unlawful conspiracy to deprive Trump of his rights.

Defense lawyers for some of the witnesses have argued that the theory is poorly defined and that their clients' prior work was properly predicated on available evidence at the time.

Earlier setbacks

The probe has faced repeated personnel changes. In the spring, a lead national-security prosecutor was replaced after raising questions about the strength of a related false-statements investigation. Career lawyers have privately expressed concern that the expansive theory risks overreach.

Congressional oversight committees are expected to seek briefings on the status of the investigation after the midterms. For now, the second resignation leaves the team thinner and the timeline for any charging decisions less certain.