Tulsi Gabbard accuses officials of orchestrating fraud in Trump’s impeachment proceedings
It was all made up by Trump haters “Deep State Actors” Within the intelligence community who secretly conspired with Democrats in Congress to remove Trump from office and subvert the will of the American people who put him there.
It was irrefutable evidence Produced on Monday 13 April By Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. On Wednesday, it sent criminal referrals to the Ministry of Justice targeting two of the central figures who pushed the impeachment proceedings, accusing them of creating a conspiracy.
The first is Michael Atkinson, who served as the intelligence community’s inspector general at the time of the impeachment hearings, and the whistleblower who filed a formal complaint about Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
President Donald Trump speaks during an event with farmers on the South Lawn of the White House, Friday, March 27, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/AP Photo)
The identity of the whistleblower — a CIA analyst and registered Democrat — has yet to be officially revealed, which is completely ridiculous. He has no right to hide in the shadows of anonymity. By law, only an IG can refuse to reveal its name. But this does not apply to anyone else. Gabbard needs to get to know him, especially since he no longer works in intelligence.
Moreover, the so-called “whistleblower” was not a whistleblower at all, as I repeatedly explained in a series of columns seven years ago during Impeach Trump. The complaint he filed against the president never qualified as a valid complaint under the whistleblower law. It does not meet the two conditions stipulated in the law.
That is, the alleged unlawful conduct must involve intelligence activity, and must be committed by a member of the intelligence community. The President is not a member of the intelligence community and never has been. Under Article II of the Constitution, the chief executive has broad authority to manage foreign affairs, negotiate with leaders of other countries, and make requests or solicit information.
Schiff’s new whistleblower leak allegation echoes years of similar accusations
This is exactly what Trump did in his conversation with Zelensky. He suggested checking on the commander Hunter BidenRidiculously lucrative business deals with the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings, as well as President Joe Biden’s subsequent on-camera bluster in which he threatened to withhold $1 billion in American taxpayer money unless the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating both Burisma and Hunter Biden was fired. It appears to have been a public and corrupt “quid pro quo” to protect his son and keep the Biden family’s financial gravy train going. It also reeks of blackmail.
There was nothing inappropriate about Trump’s phone conversation because the younger Biden was already the subject of a Justice Department criminal investigation into his highly questionable international business schemes. Trump’s request was reasonable and not at all unusual. Other presidents have done the same.
Our Department of Justice has requested foreign assistance in numerous cases over the years. Bosses sometimes intervene. It was ridiculous for Democrats to declare the conversation an impeachable offense. Yet they did so with enthusiasm.
They deliberately took advantage of a fake whistleblower who had absolutely no direct knowledge of the phone conversation. He did not listen or read a text from it. He simply heard about it from someone else. The Constitution does not grant review or veto power to unelected and inferior bureaucrats over the highest-ranking employee of the United States government, the President.
Again, I am He wrote about this As the impeachment saga unfolds in 2019:
House members vote as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, of California, stands at the podium, during a vote on the second article of impeachment of President Donald Trump, Wednesday, December 18, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Szymanski) (Fox News)
“So what should we call a fake ‘whistleblower?’ It would be more accurate to describe him as a confidential informant working as a Democratic operative spying on President Trump by collecting hearsay information intended to harm him.”
“Furthermore, there is mounting evidence that the informant was aided and abetted by Schiff and/or Schiff’s staff to invent a pretext for the president’s impeachment.”
Gabbard’s never-before-seen documents certainly confirm this. The whistleblower eventually admitted that he was a partisan who “worked closely with Vice President Biden” and “traveled with Biden to Ukraine.” In other words, when Trump became president, the analyst appears to have been integrated as a hostile “spy” and became instrumental in provoking the fraudulent impeachment.
Equally shocking is the alleged role played by Atkinson, who was supposed to remain a fair and impartial inspector general. However, records show that he confirmed the fake whistleblower’s credibility knowing full well that he had provided false information in his complaint. “I also want to make clear that I never considered the whistleblower to be politically biased,” he said during his testimony.
The identity of the whistleblower — a CIA analyst and registered Democrat — has yet to be officially revealed, which is completely ridiculous.
Atkinson had the duty to throw the complaint trash into the nearest trash bin. the Office of the Legal Counsel of the Ministry of Justice He declared it so deficient that Congress should not be notified. Instead, IG did the opposite. He called the complaint an “urgent concern” when it was not and used it as a cudgel against Trump, aggressively pushing for impeachment.
Worse still, exculpatory evidence that could have benefited Trump has been deliberately withheld from Congress, the American people, and the impeachment defense team. It was hidden under the “secret” mark. No one was ever told about the CIA analyst’s acute bias, his political motivations, or his critical admission that “I have no direct knowledge of the President’s private comments or communications.”
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee at the time, a Democrat Adam Schiff He knew all about the exculpatory evidence but hid it. Covertly, the analyst coordinated with Schiff’s staff before filing the whistleblower complaint. Trump was set up.
Publicly, Schiff insisted he never knew the man’s name “We didn’t talk directly To the whistleblower.” When that was revealed to be untrue, Schiff tried to retract it. Documents show that the analyst also lied to Atkinson. He later apologized for promoting the same deception that Schiff had used. Amazingly, the apology itself was covered up.
Gabbard accused Atkinson of ignoring Department of Justice guidance, exceeding his statutory mandate and using the whistleblowing process as a weapon. “Inspector General Atkinson failed in his responsibility to the American people, putting political motives above the truth.”
The inescapable conclusion that can be drawn from the newly declassified documents is that Trump was involved. Gabbard said elements within the intelligence community, including Atkinson and the bogus whistleblower, planned a conspiracy that was used as a basis for the impeachment of President Trump.
Click here for more Fox News opinions
Democrats like Schiff I knew it was completely fake but he didn’t care. Their goal, as it has always been, was to destroy Trump and remove him from office.
Our Department of Justice has requested foreign assistance in numerous cases over the years. Bosses sometimes intervene. It was ridiculous for Democrats to declare the conversation an impeachable offense. Yet they did so with enthusiasm.
Now that the malicious lies have been exposed, what happens next?
Click here to download the FOX NEWS app
The Justice Department, relying on Gabbard’s criminal referral, must conduct a thorough investigation. Possible charges could include false statements, perjury, obstruction and conspiracy to defraud the government. Those who conjured up false accusations must be held accountable in court.
Naturally, Trump survived the ordeal of impeachment. History books should be true to the truth and call it a farce.
Click here to read more from Greg Jarrett
Post Comment