Gabbard Orders Review Of Intel Alleging Ukraine Aid Diversion to Biden, Dems
A newly declassified intelligence summary is raising questions about whether U.S. taxpayer funds intended for Ukraine were part of a broader scheme to benefit Democratic political operations and then-President Joe Biden, according to officials familiar with the matter. The allegation is now being reviewed after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard requested a deeper examination of the underlying records.
Gabbard asked officials at the U.S. Agency for International Development to conduct a review of contracts, payments, and internal communications tied to the claims, officials said. The effort could lead to a criminal referral to the Federal Bureau of Investigation if supporting evidence is found, Just The News reported.
The declassified document is described as a summary of raw intelligence intercepts collected by U.S. agencies in late 2022. Officials who reviewed the material said the allegation did not appear to receive significant follow-up inside the government at the time.
Gabbard’s team has not identified evidence showing the claims were fully investigated during the Biden administration, according to officials. The intercepts also are not believed to be tied to Russian disinformation efforts, those officials said.
According to the summary, the alleged plan involved using foreign aid channels as a political pipeline. The report claims Ukrainian officials and unspecified U.S. personnel working through USAID in Kyiv discussed funding an infrastructure project that would serve as a cover for redirecting money.
“The Ukrainian Government and unspecified U.S. Government personnel, through USAID in Kyiv, reportedly developed a plan that would provide hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund an infrastructure project for Ukraine that would be used as a cover to send approximately 90% of funds allocated to the DNC to fund Joe Biden’s reelection campaign,” the summary stated.
“They were confident the project would be funded initially, even though at some time in the future the project would be disapproved as unnecessary,” the report added. “At this time, the money would already be allocated and impossible to return or use for a different purpose.”
🚨 HOLY CRAP! DNI Tulsi Gabbard has learned that US intelligence intercepted Ukraine government plans to route HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of American tax dollars to boost Biden’s 2024 campaign against Donald Trump, and the DNC — Just The News
Gabbard is now asking the US Agency for… pic.twitter.com/5aFal3eOwE
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 26, 2026
The summary said the alleged plan relied on subcontracting layers to make tracking funds difficult. Officials said two American subcontractors were referenced in the intercepts, but their names remain redacted in the declassified version.
“The plan included details of how subcontractors would be funded through U.S. companies so that how the funds were spent and allocated would be difficult to track,” the report stated. “Additionally, contracts would be executed that would be difficult to verify.”
The allegations come at a sensitive time for Ukraine as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues negotiations with envoys from President Donald Trump aimed at ending the war with Russia.
Ukraine has faced ongoing scrutiny over corruption concerns even as it receives continued Western support.
Over the weekend, President Trump also revealed that Gabbard has a “softer” stance than he does on Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, adding that he still has confidence in his director of national intelligence.
“I would say that I am very strong on the fact that I don’t want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because if they had a nuclear weapon they’d use it immediately. I think she’s probably a little softer on that issue, but that’s okay. Some people are,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One en route back to Washington.
“Most people aren’t. Most people are saying thank you very much for doing what you did,” he continued.
The president made the comments when asked whether he still has confidence in Gabbard.
“Yeah, sure,” Trump responded to the question. “I mean she’s a little bit different in her thought process than me, but that doesn’t make somebody not available to serve.”
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
