Gabbard Reveals New Details on Trump’s Impeachment

On Monday, Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, shared documents indicating that the impeachment of President Donald Trump stemmed from hearsay and false accusations linked to a conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July 2019. This occurred ahead of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

Interestingly, at least two individuals involved in this matter might face criminal charges.

“Deep State actors among the intelligence community created a misleading narrative that Congress exploited to undermine the will of the American people,” Gabbard stated.

Eric Sciamella, who was implicated as a whistleblower, claimed in August 2019 that Trump misused his presidential authority to solicit foreign intervention in the upcoming election. His allegations included pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, a key political opponent.

Michael Atkinson, who served as the intelligence community’s inspector general at that time, deemed the whistleblower’s complaint credible and quickly sent it to Congress, despite several concerns:

• Only four interviews were conducted, including one with a known associate of the whistleblower in Russia.
• No access to call records was obtained.
• Atkinson was aware that Sciamella was a registered Democrat, had worked with Biden, traveled to Ukraine with him, and had a history of complaints to right-wing blogs.
• Atkinson acknowledged that Sciamella lacked direct evidence to support the allegations.

It appears Sciamella’s complaint contributed to the House of Representatives passing impeachment articles against Trump in December 2019.

Gabbard emphasized that these actions were not just about policy but a significant overreach. She is now urging the Justice Department to investigate the two individuals previously mentioned.

According to reports, Gabbard is preparing criminal referrals related to the whistleblower and a former intelligence agency official, though the specifics of the alleged crimes remain unclear.

Notably, recent reviews suggest that potential criminal activity relates to the circumstances detailed in congressional briefings.

The Department of Justice has been approached for further comment.