...
By Gabe Whisnant and Dan Gooding
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
President Donald Trump spoke directly with FBI agents involved in a recent search of a Georgia election facility, The New York Times reported Monday.
According to the Times, the call took place a day after FBI agents searched an election center in Fulton County, seizing ballots and other materials related to the 2020 presidential election. The paper reported that the January 29 conversation occurred during a closed‑door meeting between agents and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the FBI’s Atlanta field office.
The Times reported that Gabbard used her cellphone to call Trump, who later returned the call and addressed the agents on speakerphone. People familiar with the discussion told the paper that Trump praised the agents and asked questions about their work, but did not give investigative direction. One U.S. official described the call as brief and motivational.
Read More on Politics
A U.S. official also told the Times that Trump personally directed Gabbard to travel to Atlanta and coordinated her actions with senior FBI leadership.
“President Trump pledged to secure America’s elections, and he has tasked the most talented team of patriots to do just that,” White House spokesman Davis Ingle told the Times. “President Trump has full confidence in his entire team. DNI Gabbard and FBI Director Patel are working together to implement the president’s election integrity priorities, and their work continues to serve him and the entire country well.”
...
FBI Seizes Fulton County’s 2020 Ballots and Records
Last week, FBI agents arrived at Fulton County’s elections operations center, secured areas around the warehouse-like facility and loaded election materials into trucks as part of a court-authorized law enforcement action tied to the 2020 vote.
Federal authorities have not publicly detailed what prompted the search or what specific allegations are under review. The FBI confirmed agents were carrying out a court-authorized action but declined to provide additional information, citing an ongoing matter. Key documents that would typically explain the basis for such an operation have not been released publicly, leaving county officials and the public without a clear explanation of why investigators believed a seizure of long-archived election materials was necessary.
Fulton County, Georgia’s most populous county and a Democratic stronghold, has been central to Trump’s claims about the 2020 election. Trump has repeatedly asserted without evidence that widespread fraud in the county cost him the state, which he narrowly lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
What Agents Sought: Ballots, Tabulator Tapes, Ballot Images and Voter Rolls
County officials said paperwork they were shown described a wide-ranging search for 2020 election materials, including physical ballots, tabulator tapes produced by scanners used to tally votes, electronic ballot images created during counting and recounting, and voter rolls.
A county commissioner said the FBI removed about 700 boxes of election materials. Local officials said the scale of what was taken and the pace of the operation made it difficult for the county to independently verify everything that left the facility in real time. Those concerns became a central point for county leaders, who said they were being asked to cooperate with an expansive seizure without the public being told why investigators believed these records were needed.
...
Inside the County Response: Confusion, Limited Access and Chain-of-Custody Worries
County officials said they learned of the federal presence as the operation was unfolding. Leaders described an initial issue involving who, under Georgia law, has legal custody of sealed election records, a discrepancy that officials said required agents to return with updated documentation before proceeding.
Attorneys reviewed the materials presented by agents and advised compliance, county officials said. Still, some county leaders said they were kept at arm’s length as records were removed, leaving them uncertain about exactly what was taken beyond the broad categories described in the paperwork.
The county’s concerns extended beyond access. Local officials said the removal of original ballots raised immediate chain-of-custody questions: once materials leave local control, they argued, it becomes harder to independently confirm the integrity and completeness of what was taken and what will ultimately be returned. Those worries are amplified by the intense political pressures that have surrounded the county since 2020.
Questions About the Warrant: Why Now, and What Was Shown to a Judge?
Beyond the spectacle of federal agents hauling away long-archived election records, the search has prompted pointed questions about its legal foundation. Federal authorities have not publicly disclosed what evidence was presented to a federal magistrate judge to justify a search targeting ballots and other materials more than five years after the election.
The sworn narrative typically used to establish probable cause has not been released publicly, and the agencies involved have declined to discuss an ongoing investigation. As a result, it remains unclear what investigators allege occurred, why they believe these materials constitute evidence of a crime, or why a broad seizure was necessary.
That lack of detail has fueled dueling narratives. Critics argue the action risks reviving claims that have repeatedly failed in court and in reviews, while supporters counter that a judge-approved warrant is part of the legal process and that investigators should be allowed to follow evidence without political pressure.
Trump’s Direct Contact With Agents Could Become a Litigation Issue
Trump's direct contact with FBI investigators could influence future litigation, the Times reported. Even if no investigative instructions were given by Trump, defense attorneys in politically sensitive cases often examine whether contacts between political leadership and front-line investigators could be used to argue improper influence.
If this investigation ultimately produced criminal charges, such contact could become part of pretrial fights over whether a case should be limited or dismissed, and defense lawyers could seek testimony from agents about early-stage communications and decision-making.
"The DNI was created to be a high-level intelligence coordinator, not a field operator. By personally participating in a raid and acting as a switchboard for the president, Gabbard has traded her statutory mandate for a partisan performance," Alexandra Chandler, director of Impact Programs, Free and Fair Elections, Protect Democracy, told Newsweek on Monday.
"This invites damning claims of undue influence and selective prosecution, effectively handing a roadmap to the defense in a future case. When the lines between national intelligence, domestic law enforcement, and the president's personal grudges are so erased, any resulting prosecution looks less like the rule of law and more like a political hit."
...
Senior Officials on Scene: Gabbard and Bailey Prompt Scrutiny
Two senior administration figures were seen at or around the elections hub during the operation: FBI co-deputy director Andrew Bailey and Gabbard.
Gabbard’s presence drew particular attention because the intelligence chief’s traditional role centers on foreign threats and coordination across intelligence agencies, not on-site involvement in domestic criminal investigative work. Administration officials defended her involvement by portraying it as connected to election security and the protection of election infrastructure from interference.
Democrats on Capitol Hill questioned the propriety of her appearance and argued that Congress should be briefed if foreign interference claims are being invoked to justify intelligence community participation in a domestic election-related action.
What’s Next: Fulton County Signals Court Challenge
Fulton County officials have signaled they are preparing to challenge the federal action in court. A county commissioner said the county planned to file a lawsuit to contest the warrant and seizure, and to compel the return of the ballots and other sensitive election records.
This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.
Update 2/2/26, 2:45 p.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.
Update 2/2/26, 5:03 p.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.
In a polarized era, the center is dismissed as bland. At Newsweek, ours is different: The Courageous Center—it's not "both sides," it's sharp, challenging and alive with ideas. We follow facts, not factions. If that sounds like the kind of journalism you want to see thrive, we need you.
When you become a Newsweek Member, you support a mission to keep the center strong and vibrant. Members enjoy: Ad-free browsing, exclusive content and editor conversations. Help keep the center courageous. Join today.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines