Bondi dismisses concerns over Gabbard’s role in FBI search of Georgia election hub

Attorney General Pam Bondi expressed confidence Friday that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s presence during an FBI search of a Georgia election office would not compromise the bureau’s investigation, despite mounting concerns from Democratic lawmakers.

The controversy emerged after President Donald Trump offered conflicting explanations about Gabbard’s involvement in the search of Fulton County’s main elections facility. At Thursday’s National Prayer Breakfast, Trump claimed Gabbard “went in at Pam’s insistence,” contradicting Gabbard’s earlier statement to lawmakers that Trump himself had requested her presence.

“DNI Gabbard and I are inseparable. We are constantly together, as are the people behind us,” Bondi said during an unrelated press conference Friday, with FBI Director Kash Patel standing nearby. “We constantly talk, we collaborate as a Cabinet. We’re all extremely close. Know what each other, what we’re doing at all times, pretty much to keep not only our country safe, but our world safe.”

The FBI operation targeted Fulton County, Georgia’s most populous county, where agents seized hundreds of boxes containing ballots and other documents related to the 2020 presidential election. The search is reportedly connected to Trump’s continued and disproven claims about his electoral defeat.

Gabbard’s participation has raised significant concerns about the separation between intelligence functions, which traditionally focus on foreign threats, and domestic law enforcement operations. Intelligence community leaders typically maintain careful distance from domestic investigations to prevent any appearance of politicization.

Democratic lawmakers have expressed alarm that Gabbard’s involvement could be laying groundwork to question the integrity of both the 2020 election results and future elections. Some legal experts suggest her presence—particularly given her acknowledgment that Trump requested it and her facilitation of a call between FBI agents and the president—could later provide an opening for defense arguments that any resulting criminal charges were politically motivated.

The administration has offered inconsistent explanations for Gabbard’s role. Days after the search, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated in a television interview that he was unaware of the reason for Gabbard’s presence and confirmed she was “not part of the grand jury investigation.” However, he also defended her involvement as part of the administration’s election integrity efforts.

In her letter to Congress, Gabbard justified her participation by citing her “broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate, and analyze intelligence related to election security.” When asked about the contradictory explanations, Gabbard’s office declined to comment and referred to Bondi’s statements.

Gabbard’s political journey adds another layer to the controversy. A former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii who ran for president before endorsing Biden in 2020, she later switched to the Republican Party and joined Trump’s current administration. Her office has declined to state whether she now accepts Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election or whom she believes legitimately won that contest.

Congressional intelligence committee Democrats have expressed particular concern about the blurring of institutional boundaries. Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement noting, “The intelligence community operates outside the borders of the US for good reason, and the Director of National Intelligence has no business at a law enforcement operation unless there is a legitimate foreign nexus, of which we’ve seen no indication.”

Both Himes and Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, have pledged to continue pressing for clarification about Gabbard’s role in the investigation and its potential implications for election security and institutional norms as the country approaches another presidential election.

The incident underscores growing tension between traditional boundaries separating intelligence, law enforcement, and political operations within the current administration.