Gabbard Sends Criminal Referrals To DOJ For 2 Officials Linked To Trump Impeachment
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has referred two former U.S. officials to the Justice Department for potential criminal investigation, escalating efforts to revisit the events that led to President Donald Trump’s first impeachment.
A spokesperson for Gabbard confirmed that the referrals target a whistleblower and former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, both of whom played central roles in the 2019 inquiry. The spokesperson did not specify what crimes were alleged, and any decision to pursue charges rests with federal prosecutors.
The move follows Gabbard’s release of newly declassified testimony and documents that she argues show a “coordinated effort” within the intelligence community to “manufacture a conspiracy” used to justify Trump’s impeachment.
Atkinson’s actions were instrumental in advancing a whistleblower complaint that raised concerns about Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In that call, Trump asked Zelenskyy to investigate then–former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
The whistleblower wrote at the time: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”
Gabbard has sharply disputed the legitimacy of that complaint and Atkinson’s handling of it. Her office said Atkinson relied on “secondhand information” and “politicized, manufactured narratives,” and “did not follow standard IG procedures.”
“In his own words, IC IG Atkinson recognizes that his conclusions were based on a ‘preliminary investigation,’” her office said, quoting testimony in which he acknowledged he had not determined whether the alleged actions “actually took place.”
Under federal law, however, an inspector general’s role at that stage is limited to assessing whether a whistleblower complaint appears credible, not to fully investigate or verify the claims.
In a post on X, Gabbard accused “deep state actors” of constructing “a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019.”
Atkinson, who was fired by Trump in 2020, previously defended his conduct, saying he had “faithfully discharged” his duties and served “without regard to partisan favor or political fear.”
Democrats quickly condemned the referrals and the broader effort to revisit the impeachment.
Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the whistleblower “demonstrated courage and principle” in exposing Trump’s “efforts to extort Ukraine and falsely smear his opponent.”
“This apparent criminal referral will amount to nothing because no misconduct occurred,” Himes said. “But what it will do is chill future whistleblowers from coming forward… I suspect that is precisely the point.”
Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, dismissed the declassified materials as “a nothingburger” and “another sad attempt… to get in Donald Trump’s good graces.”
Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress tied to the Ukraine matter. He was acquitted by the Senate in early 2020 in a largely party-line vote and has consistently denied wrongdoing, calling his conversation with Zelenskyy “perfect.”
The latest referrals come as part of a broader push by Gabbard and other officials to reexamine controversies from Trump’s first term, including intelligence assessments of Russian election interference. While some figures connected to those investigations have been subpoenaed in ongoing probes, no charges have been filed.
At the same time, the effort unfolds against a backdrop of renewed political and legal scrutiny surrounding Trump. While prior impeachment proceedings ended in acquittal and are widely viewed as politically unlikely to result in removal from office, they continue to shape partisan divisions in Washington. Any new impeachment-related efforts would face long odds in Congress, particularly given the high threshold required for conviction in the Senate.
Still, the renewed focus on the 2019 impeachment underscores how the political battles of Trump’s presidency continue to reverberate, with competing narratives over the Ukraine episode remaining central to broader debates about executive power, accountability, and the role of intelligence agencies in U.S. politics.
Hunter Biden Admits His ‘Bias’ Towards Pardons, Says Founders ‘Didn’t Imagine Trump’
Hunter Biden is openly acknowledging what critics have argued for months: when it comes to his father’s sweeping pardon, he is anything but objective.
“I’m completely biased as it relates to what my dad did for me. I fully understand how uniquely situated I am in being privileged enough to have received a pardon from my father,” Hunter said in an interview published by liberal outlet MediasTouch.
The admission revives scrutiny over former President Joe Biden’s dramatic reversal on the issue. After repeatedly insisting he would not grant clemency to his son, Biden ultimately issued a sweeping pardon—undercutting Democrats’ long-standing “no one is above the law” message as Hunter faced serious federal charges.
Despite conceding his own bias, Hunter declined to weigh in on potential reforms to the presidential pardon system. Instead, he pivoted to attacking former President Donald Trump’s use of the same authority, pointing to the more than 1,000 individuals pardoned in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol protest.
Hunter Biden was granted an unusually broad pardon covering any offense he “has committed or may have committed” between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2024—a scope that drew bipartisan criticism.
The legal backdrop is significant. In September 2024, Hunter pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges tied to a scheme that evaded more than $1.4 million in taxes. Months earlier, he was convicted in Delaware for lying about his drug use on a federal firearm purchase form.
Still, Hunter sought to shift the focus toward Trump and his family, saying, “I don’t think that the founders ever imagined Donald Trump. I don’t think they ever imagined the Trump family.”
He also attempted to contrast pardon totals: “I don’t think people understand is that, in the first year, I think—I don’t know the exact number—I think my dad gave 80 or so pardons over a four-year period of time. I think that that’s about the number.”
Trump, notably, did not pardon any of his children during his presidency, though he did grant clemency in 2020 to Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law.
The White House defended Trump’s record, with spokeswoman Abigail Jackson saying he has used his authority to pardon individuals who were victims of what she described as a “weaponized justice system.”
Jackson also criticized Biden’s final actions in office, arguing that “the only pardons anyone should be critical of are from President Autopen,” citing clemency for violent offenders and “proactive pardons he ‘signed’ for his family members like Hunter on his way out the door.”
In addition to Hunter, Biden issued pardons to several relatives, including his brother James, sister-in-law Sara, sister Valerie, and brother Francis—moves he framed as necessary protection against political retaliation.
READ NEXT: Congresswoman Resigns In Stunning Last-Minute Exit
Sponsored
Tick-Tock: Time is running out to sync your Trump account before your data is lost forever! Team Trump is counting on you. HURRY, before it’s too late! [Click HERE to update your info]