The question on many minds today is whether the Department of Justice (DOJ) would consider prosecuting one of its own for potentially unauthorized leaking of grand jury information. At the heart of this controversy is Ed Martin, who appears to be navigating the storm with a smile.

On Thursday morning, Martin took to X to post a cheerful photograph of himself alongside Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the second-in-command at the DOJ under U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. This post was captioned with his usual upbeat greeting, “Good morning, America. How are ya?”

Martin’s buoyant demeanor comes amid a turbulent period for him. The former U.S. attorney nominee and current U.S. Pardon Attorney has recently been in the spotlight following reports that he was demoted in January from his role as the DOJ’s “Weaponization Working Group” czar. This position had been instrumental for Martin in targeting what were perceived as enemies of former President Donald Trump.

A recent investigation by CNN has brought more serious allegations to light. According to their report, Blanche’s office examined whether Martin improperly leaked sensitive grand jury details to unauthorized parties. This information pertained to an investigation into Senator Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California and a longtime adversary of Trump, who faced allegations of mortgage fraud.

The CNN report, citing unnamed sources, indicated that the DOJ concluded Martin mishandled the grand jury materials. His emails allegedly contradicted his prior denials, casting doubt on his handling of the sensitive information.

Meanwhile, Todd Blanche has publicly stated that “there are no misconduct investigations into Ed Martin,” while commending Martin for his performance as Pardon Attorney, describing him as doing a “great job.”

According to the report, which cited anonymous sources, the DOJ came away from that review concluding Martin did mishandle grand jury materials, after Martin’s emails allegedly undermined his denials.

Blanche, for his part, was quoted in the story saying that “there are no misconduct investigations into Ed Martin,” while praising him for doing a “great job as Pardon Attorney.”

Close readers, and the CNN story itself, noted that stating there are not misconduct investigations into Martin does not answer the question of whether there ever were such probes, or if there are investigations that run deeper than “misconduct.” A reported DOJ finding of misconduct has not led to criminal charges, however, and a source in Martin’s camp reportedly said he “followed DOJ standards and procedures at all times.”

Multiple lawyers rapidly reacted to CNN’s reporting using the words “if” and “looks like” when sounding an alarm about possible “federal crimes.”

“Ed Martin was found, per CNN below, by DOJ to have violated GJ secrecy and also apparently lied about it,” said former Mueller probe prosecutor Andrew Weissmann. “If the reporting is accurate, both are federal crimes. Will Martin be charged, given how quick a trigger this DOJ has re Letitia James & James Comey?”

“If a prosecutor provides grand jury materials to an unauthorized person, that is a criminal contempt of court,” said Rep. Daniel Goldman, a Democrat and former longtime federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. “If ‘no one is above the law,’ as @AGPamBondi often preposterously says, why isn’t @EagleEdMartin being held in contempt?”

“Looks like Ed Martin may have committed some crimes so it makes perfect sense that he’s staying on as the DOJ Pardon Attorney!” remarked former Obama administration DOJ and DHS lawyer Eric Columbus.

The DOJ’s Criminal Resource Manual specifically addresses when criminal contempt or obstruction prosecutions may be brought against “an attorney for the government” bound by grand jury secrecy Rule 6(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The manual says the DOJ is not prevented from “prosecuting a United States Attorney, an Assistant United States Attorney, or a Department of Justice attorney who obtains grand jury information in his or her official capacity for criminal contempt under 18 U.S.C. § 401(3) if he or she makes an unauthorized disclosure of grand jury information.”

In addition, the DOJ says, the “unauthorized disclosure of grand jury information can also be punished under other criminal statutes as well as pursuant to a district court’s contempt powers.”

“If an individual discloses grand jury material with the intent to obstruct an ongoing investigation, he or she may be prosecuted for obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503,” the manual states.