US spy chief sends criminal referrals to JOD for whistleblower, watchdog in Trump’s 1st impeachment probe

US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard requested the Justice Department look into two former officials who were key figures in President Donald Trump‘s first impeachment investigation.

A spokesperson for Gabbard’s office confirmed that she drafted criminal referrals for a whistleblower and a former intelligence community watchdog but did not detail what specific crimes are alleged, according to CBS News.

Whether to pursue a criminal investigation following a referral is up to prosecutors at the Justice Department, it added.

The move followed Gabbard’s criticism of how former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson handled a 2019 whistleblower complaint.

She also released a collection of documents related to Atkinson.

The whistleblower, whose identity remains undisclosed, raised an “urgent concern” about Trump’s request that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

The complaint also questioned how records of a Trump-Zelenskyy call were managed and highlighted the involvement of Trump’s then-personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, in US-Ukraine relations.

“I have received information from multiple US 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,” the whistleblower was quoted by CBS News as saying.

“This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals,” the whistleblower wrote.

Gabbard claimed in a post on the US social media platform X that officials within the intelligence community fabricated a misleading narrative, which Congress then used to override the will of voters and impeach President Donald Trump in 2019.

She also contended that the inspector general’s review of the whistleblower complaint was based on second-hand information.

However, the documents do not offer any direct proof of criminal misconduct.