The deep levels of corruption ongoing in our government must continue to be exposed.
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) October 2, 2025
“Odebrecht paid around $788 million in bribes to politicians, officials, and parties across 12 countries to secure contracts.”
Go @EagleEdMartin shine a bright light on these actions.… https://t.co/5z395HUkGM
Weissmann has until October 7 to respond about his role in the Odebrecht scandal.
The Odebrecht scandal was a massive international bribery scheme. The DOJ’s 2016 plea deal (which Weissmann oversaw) is now being re-examined because it shielded Odebrecht from having to pay back victims in countries like Peru. Trump’s DOJ task force is pressing Weissmann to explain why — and whether this was an abuse of authority.
What Was the Odebrecht Scandal?
Odebrecht S.A., a Brazilian construction conglomerate, was at the center the largest corruption investigation in Latin American history.Odebrecht paid around $788 million in bribes to politicians, officials, and parties across 12 countries to secure contracts.
The bribes distorted government tenders and saddled countries with overpriced infrastructure projects.
In 2016, Odebrecht signed a plea deal with the DOJ, Brazil, and Switzerland paying $3.5 billion in fines.
Why Is the DOJ Letter Questioning It?
The letter from Edward Martin points out that in other corruption cases from the same period (Embraer, OZ Africa, Glencore), the DOJ preserved detailed project-level information, identified specific victims, and ensured restitution. In the 2016 Odebrecht plea, the DOJ aggregated facts by country and left out specifics like the Rutas de Lima project.
The consequence is that victims were erased from the official record.
In Peru, taxpayers remain liable for billions in corrupt project costs because restitution wasn’t written into the plea. Meanwhile, U.S. court filings in similar cases gave restitution to victims.
It looks like the DOJ let Odebrecht off easier than others.Why Is Weissmann Being Asked Now?
Andrew Weissmann supervised the Fraud Section at DOJ during 2016. He was one of the architects of the Odebrecht plea deal.
Edward Martin, under Trump’s EO 14147, is investigating whether this was an “abuse of government authority”Ed Martin is essentially asking Weissmann:
“Why did you (and your team) make decisions in Odebrecht that went against DOJ’s own guidance and hurt foreign victims — when other cases around the same time did the opposite?”It’s a Big Deal as Peru are still on the hook financially for billions. If Weissmann handled Odebrecht differently, the question is why.
This is part of a broader investigation of whether DOJ was “weaponized” — using discretion inconsistently for political or other reasons.
Replies