| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government Corruption |
| Impeachment Bombshell: Secret memos expose Ukraine accuser's bias, hearsay, and false claim |
| 2026-04-13 |
| [JTN] The new memos declassified by Tulsi Gabbard were not available to the public during the 2019 impeachment trial. The U.S. intelligence watchdog developed derogatory evidence about the CIA analyst who prompted the 2019 Ukraine-focused impeachment against Donald Trump, including that he submitted false information in his whistleblower complaint, offered hearsay to support his allegations and had the "potential for bias," according to newly declassified memos that were kept from Americans during the failed bid by Democrats to remove the president from office six years ago. The documents declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the request of Just the News provide a starkly different portrait of the alleged whistleblower whose name and face were never shown to the public and whose lawyerly written letter accusing Trump of hijacking Ukraine policy for political gain was heralded by Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings. Investigators for the Intelligence Community Inspector General documented several concerns about the Trump accuser's political motives, noting he admitted he was a "registered Democrat" who had worked closely with Joe Biden on Ukraine issues and who disliked some of the conservative figures in the president's orbit, the memos show. The investigators also elicited an apology from the Trump accuser for misleading the probe and were acutely aware his allegations were based solely on second- and third-hand accounts about what Trump was alleged to have said and done. “I do not have direct knowledge of private comments or communications by the President,” the alleged whistleblower, who claimed Trump improperly tried to pressure Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to investigate Hunter Biden, admitted in his initial August 2019 intake form. That stunning line on the limitations of the whistleblower's knowledge was not included in the nine-page letter then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., released in late summer 2019 that touched off a months-long political maelstrom and led to Trump's impeachment by a Democrat-led House and his eventual acquittal in the Senate. You can read the documents here: Defense lawyers for Trump as well as some members of Congress who served as impeachment managers told Just the News they were deeply concerned the derogatory evidence about Trump's accuser was kept classified by then-Inspector General Michael Atkinson and Schiff, preventing it from being used to defend the president or conduct impartial proceedings in the House and Senate. "Our adversarial system of justice requires the government to turn all exculpatory evidence over to the accused. That’s especially true when lawmakers seek to remove a duly elected president through impeachment and a Senate trial," said famed Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, one of Trump's defense lawyers in the case. "The evidence about the bias and credibility of the whistleblower who started the scandal should have been front and center in the 2019 impeachment, but it was hidden by bureaucrats and that was a disservice to justice and to the American people," Dershowitz said. Mark Meadows, who as a North Carolina congressman served as an impeachment manager defending Trump before becoming his White House chief of staff, said GOP lawmakers during the impeachment had serious concerns about the alleged whistleblower and were "questioning his credibility and truthfulness. "The exaggerated pushback and concern from Chairman Adam Schiff made many Republicans members think that there was much more of a coordinated propaganda effort than seeking the truth in any potential wrongdoing," Meadows said. "Democrats leaked everything from the secure deposition room except the fact that they were coordinating with a 'so called' whistleblower who had no first-hand knowledge of the subject." WHISTLEBLOWER MENTIONED BILL BARR, KASH PATEL AND DEVIN NUNES, FELT THREATENED BY 'RIGHT-WING BLOGGERS' The memos also disclose numerous other details about the whistleblower and the intelligence community's assessment of his claims that weren't available to the public, including that the CIA analyst:
Such spontaneous statements during the early intelligence community's review of the whistleblower complaint led the inspector general's agents to raise red flags about the complaining CIA officer's possible political bias. While Atkinson kept the memos secret, he did grant a closed-door classified interview to lawmakers during the leadup to the House impeachment proceedings. The House Intelligence Committee is expected to release the transcript of that interview as early as this week. Nunes, who was still in Congress during the impeachment and now serves as the chairman of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board, told Just the News the impeachment process was a "shocking and shameful chapter in our history" and the new memos "further demonstrate the highly orchestrated way the fake whistleblower manufactured and deployed his complaint. "It was clearly a staged attack by anti-Trump malcontents in the intelligence bureaucracy who believed that they, not the American people, should determine who is the U.S. president," Nunes said. "The Democrats and the media promoted this hoax as a desperate Plan B after their original pretext for impeaching Trump - Russian collusion - finally collapsed following Special Counsel Mueller's inept testimony to Congress." FAULTY INTELLIGENCE AND POORLY EXECUTED SPY TRADECRAFT Even supporters of the alleged whisteblower had concerns, the memos show. The official identified only as “Witness 2” disclosed that even though he came to vouch for and support the whistleblower, he had his own concerns about the allegations and would not have made such allegations based on what he knew. "Witness 2 made it clear that [Redacted] would not have taken independent action on the information [Redacted] read in the transcript for two reasons: first that [Redacted] routinely deals with issues on a daily basis that are contrary to [Redacted] personal beliefs; and second that [Redacted] did not have the level of granular insight of details related to the Ukraine that Complainant had,” the memo said. “Witness 2 could not connect the same dots that Complainant did into the impact of what was said during the telephone call.” |
| Posted by:Skidmark |
| #7 |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2026-04-13 16:13 |
| #6 |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2026-04-13 16:05 |
| #5 |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2026-04-13 09:57 |
| #4 |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2026-04-13 09:54 |
| #3 |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2026-04-13 09:30 |
| #2 |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2026-04-13 09:20 |
| #1 |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2026-04-13 09:07 |