Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has formally referred the whistleblower behind President Trump's first impeachment and the former inspector general who advanced the complaint to the Justice Department for possible criminal prosecution, her office confirmed this week.
The referrals target the intelligence community employee whose 2019 complaint about Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy triggered impeachment proceedings, along with former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. Gabbard says newly declassified records show both individuals played roles in manufacturing a false narrative that Congress weaponized against a sitting president. The Justice Department now must decide whether the evidence warrants charges.
ODNI's general counsel sent the referral directly to DOJ leadership. Fox News reported that the letter stated plainly:
"I want to refer information that may constitute possible criminal activity in violation of federal criminal law committed by one or more former employees of the intelligence community."
An intelligence official told Fox News Digital that the broad referral language is specifically directed at Atkinson and the whistleblower tied to concerns about Trump's July 2019 call with Zelenskyy. The referral does not name specific criminal statutes, but it invokes alleged bias, misleading statements, and procedural irregularities uncovered through recently declassified materials.
An ODNI spokesperson confirmed the action in nearly identical terms to multiple outlets. Just The News reported the spokesperson's statement:
"ODNI can confirm a criminal referral was sent to DOJ related to one or more former employees of the Intelligence Community and their role in the 2019 impeachment of President Trump."
Gabbard's office released declassified documents and testimony that ODNI says show Atkinson failed to conduct due diligence when he received the whistleblower's complaint in 2019. Fox News reported that ODNI contends Atkinson improperly labeled the complaint an "urgent concern," a legal designation that required him to forward it to Congress and that set the impeachment machinery in motion.
Gabbard has been blunt about her view of what happened. She posted on X that the declassified records tell a damning story. CBS News reported her statement:
"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 also said Atkinson "weaponized the whistle-blower process" and used his office to "manufacture a conspiracy that was used as the basis to impeach President Trump." Those are the DNI's characterizations, not adjudicated findings, but they now form the backbone of a formal criminal referral sitting on DOJ desks.
The referrals also follow Gabbard's declassification of intelligence alleging the whistleblower misled investigators and harbored potential bias and animus toward conservatives. ODNI says Atkinson kept that evidence from the impeachment proceedings, a claim that, if substantiated, could raise serious questions about whether Congress acted on an incomplete and distorted record. Gabbard's office has previously drawn scrutiny over its handling of whistleblower-related briefings to Congress, making the current referral all the more significant in the broader fight over intelligence community transparency.
The Washington Examiner reported that newly declassified records and congressional transcripts indicate the whistleblower contacted congressional Democrats before filing the complaint. That detail raises concerns about coordination that was not publicly known at the time of the impeachment proceedings.
If true, the pre-filing contact could undercut the narrative that the whistleblower acted independently through proper channels. It could also implicate Atkinson, who certified the complaint and sent it forward without disclosing any knowledge of such contacts. Investigators will need to determine the scope and nature of those communications and whether Atkinson was aware of them when he made his certification.
The question of whether intelligence officials coordinated with political actors before a formal complaint was filed sits at the heart of the referral. It is the difference between a good-faith whistleblower report and what Gabbard's office characterizes as a politically engineered operation.
A criminal referral is not a charge. It is a formal request for prosecutors to review evidence and decide whether to open an investigation or bring an indictment. Newsmax noted that the Justice Department still must decide whether to bring any charges, and no timeline for that decision has been announced.
The referral lands at a Justice Department that has already shown willingness to revisit politically charged matters from previous administrations. DOJ has recently issued subpoenas targeting political figures tied to earlier controversies, and the department is simultaneously investigating prominent officials for obstruction in unrelated cases. The Gabbard referral fits a broader pattern of the current administration using federal law enforcement tools to reexamine conduct that conservatives have long argued was shielded from accountability.
Prosecutors will need to weigh whether the declassified evidence supports specific criminal violations, not just policy disagreements or judgment calls. The legal threshold for prosecuting a former inspector general or a whistleblower is high, and any prosecution would face intense political headwinds from Democrats who view the 2019 impeachment as legitimate oversight.
Trump's first impeachment centered on a July 2019 phone call in which he asked Zelenskyy to look into the business dealings of Joe Biden's son in Ukraine. Democrats argued the call amounted to soliciting foreign interference in a U.S. election. The House impeached Trump in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The Senate acquitted him in February 2020.
The whistleblower complaint that started the process was filed by an intelligence community employee who had secondhand knowledge of the call. Atkinson, then the IC inspector general, reviewed the complaint, deemed it credible and of "urgent concern," and forwarded it to Congress. Republicans at the time questioned the whistleblower's motives and Atkinson's judgment, but the impeachment proceeded without the whistleblower ever testifying publicly.
The New York Post reported that the referral cites alleged procedural failures and possible criminal activity in Atkinson's communications with the House Intelligence Committee. If prosecutors pursue the case, they will likely examine whether Atkinson's "urgent concern" designation was legally justified or whether it stretched the statute beyond its intended scope to achieve a political outcome.
Gabbard's office has faced its own controversies as DNI, including questions about her role in a Georgia election-related matter that drew public scrutiny. But the criminal referral shifts the spotlight back to the intelligence community's conduct in 2019 and whether officials abused their positions to target a president they opposed.
Authorities have not publicly confirmed whether Atkinson or the whistleblower have retained counsel or responded to the referral. The whistleblower's identity has never been officially confirmed by the government, though it has been widely reported in media. No public statement from either individual appeared in any of the reporting on the referral.
Investigators will also need to determine whether other intelligence community employees played supporting roles in the events ODNI now characterizes as criminal. The referral's language, covering "one or more former employees," leaves room for a broader inquiry if DOJ chooses to pursue one.
Even if DOJ declines prosecution, the referral carries political weight. It places the 2019 impeachment back in the national conversation and reframes it through the lens of alleged misconduct by the people who initiated it. For conservatives, the declassified materials validate years of claims that the impeachment was a setup. For Democrats, the referral will look like retaliation dressed in legal clothing.
The legal system will sort the difference. But the referral is now a matter of public record, the declassified documents are out, and the Justice Department has a decision to make. Whether charges follow or not, the institutional question is the same one that has dogged Washington for years: when intelligence officials act on political motives, who holds them accountable?
That question just got a formal address at the Department of Justice. The answer will say a great deal about whether the rules apply to everyone, or only to those without the right connections.
