Listen to the article
ODNI Sends Criminal Referrals to DOJ in Trump Impeachment Whistleblower Case
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department targeting both the whistleblower whose complaint sparked President Donald Trump’s 2019 impeachment and former intelligence community inspector general Michael Atkinson, Fox News Digital has learned.
Documents reviewed by Fox News Digital reveal the referrals specifically address “possible criminal activity in violation of federal criminal law committed by one or more former employees of the intelligence community.” The referrals cite congressional briefings from 2019 involving the Intelligence Community Inspector General and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
An intelligence official confirmed to Fox News Digital that while the language in the referral appears broad, it specifically targets Atkinson and the whistleblower who reported concerns about Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
The referrals follow Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s release of documents earlier this week that allegedly expose what she described as a “coordinated effort” within the intelligence community to “manufacture a conspiracy” that served as the foundation for Trump’s 2019 impeachment.
“Newly-declassified records expose how deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019,” Gabbard posted on X on Monday.
The documents Gabbard released include previously withheld transcripts of Atkinson’s closed-door testimony before the House intelligence committee. These transcripts were not provided to the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment trial. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., led a vote to release these materials in March.
According to ODNI, the documents confirm that Atkinson “failed to conduct basic due diligence and willfully exceeded his statutory jurisdiction to mischaracterize the president’s phone call with Zelensky as an ‘urgent concern’ to Congress.”
The controversy stems from August 2019, when Atkinson received a complaint from a whistleblower expressing concerns about Trump’s July 2019 call with Zelenskyy. During that call, Trump pressed the Ukrainian leader to investigate the Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, specifically Hunter Biden’s involvement with Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings and then-Vice President Joe Biden’s role in the dismissal of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin.
Notably, Atkinson found the whistleblower showed indications of “political bias” and was “in favor of a rival political candidate,” yet still deemed the complaint a matter of “urgent concern.”
Democrats viewed Trump’s request as a quid pro quo because U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen at the time. They argued Trump was interfering in the 2020 election by asking a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent.
The White House later released a declassified version of the whistleblower complaint, which revealed that the whistleblower’s concerns were based on secondhand accounts from “more than half a dozen U.S. officials.” The whistleblower acknowledged in the complaint: “I was not a direct witness to most of the events described. However, I found my colleagues’ accounts of these events to be credible, because, in almost all cases, multiple officials recounted fact patterns that were consistent with one another.”
House Republicans had previously sought to refer both Atkinson and the whistleblower to the Department of Justice for investigation in 2019 and 2020. They raised concerns about the whistleblower’s contact with staff members of then-Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., prior to filing the complaint—contact that Schiff later downplayed.
The impeachment process culminated with Trump being impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019 and subsequently acquitted by the Senate in February 2020.
The Justice Department has not yet responded to requests for comment on these new referrals. The White House has also not issued any statement regarding this development.
The referrals represent a significant escalation in the ongoing political battle over the legitimacy of Trump’s first impeachment and could potentially lead to criminal investigations of key figures involved in that process.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
18 Comments
This is a complex and politically fraught issue. I hope the DOJ investigation is conducted with the utmost care and objectivity, regardless of the parties involved.
Absolutely. Upholding the rule of law and due process should be the top priority, not political agendas.
The referrals appear to be a significant development in the ongoing saga surrounding the Trump impeachment. I’ll be following this story closely to see how it unfolds.
Agreed. It will be interesting to see what new information emerges and how it impacts the broader political landscape.
The referrals seem to raise more questions than answers at this stage. I look forward to seeing the details and evidence as the investigation progresses.
Agreed. It’s crucial that the public has confidence in the integrity of the process and the conclusions reached.
This seems politically charged, but I think it’s important to let the legal process unfold. Whistleblowers play a critical role, but rules must be followed. I hope the facts come to light.
Valid point. Whistleblowing is a delicate issue, and the rules around it need to be clear and consistently applied.
Intriguing development. I’m curious to see how this plays out and what new information might come to light. Accountability is important, but the process must be fair and transparent.
I agree, it’s a complex situation that deserves careful consideration. Let’s hope the investigation is thorough and impartial.
The referrals raise some concerning questions. I’m curious to learn more about the specific allegations and the rationale behind the decision. Transparency is key.
I agree. The public deserves to understand the reasoning and evidence behind any potential criminal charges in this case.
This is a concerning development that warrants close attention. I hope the DOJ investigation is thorough and that the facts, whatever they may be, are brought to light.
Well said. Maintaining public trust in the justice system is paramount, especially in high-profile cases with political implications.
This is a sensitive and politically charged issue. I hope the DOJ investigation is thorough and impartial, focusing on facts rather than partisan agendas.
Well said. Maintaining objectivity will be crucial in this case, given the high-profile nature of the individuals involved.
It will be interesting to see what the DOJ investigation uncovers. Transparency is key in matters like this, but national security concerns must also be addressed.
Agreed. A balance between accountability and protecting sensitive information is crucial. Hopefully, the process is handled with care and diligence.