FBI affidavit ties Fulton County raid to years‑old fraud claims and a referral

An unsealed FBI affidavit released Feb. 10 says federal agents executed a late‑January search of Fulton County election facilities to seize 2020 ballots and records as part of a criminal probe into alleged “deficiencies or defects” in the county’s presidential vote count. The affidavit, signed by FBI Special Agent Hugh Raymond Evans, says the inquiry is intended to determine whether any alleged improprieties were intentional violations of federal law.

“This warrant application is part of an FBI criminal investigation into whether any of the improprieties were intentional acts that violated federal criminal laws,” the affidavit states. It says the investigation grew out of a referral from Kurt Olsen, an attorney who challenged 2020 results and who the filing identifies as serving in a federal election integrity position. The warrant was signed by a federal magistrate judge, the affidavit adds.

The warrant authorized the seizure of “all physical ballots” from the 2020 general election in Fulton County along with tabulator tapes, ballot images and voter rolls. Agents removed a large volume of material; public accounts differ on the exact tally, describing either “hundreds of boxes” or “more than 650 boxes” of ballots and related records. Reports also differ on whether the search took place Jan. 28 or Jan. 29.

The affidavit lists specific concerns investigators want to resolve, including Fulton County’s admission that it lacks scanned images of all ballots from the original count and recount, and the county’s confirmation that some ballots were scanned multiple times during a recount. It cites a “central allegation” that 17,852 duplicate ballot images were introduced into a county file and quotes a witness as saying the duplicates were “more pro‑Trump than the confirmed Fulton County votes,” an observation the affidavit says “indicated … that the introduction of duplicate ballots was intended to make the recount numbers match more than to affect the outcome of the election.”

Evans’s affidavit stresses the role of intent in distinguishing administrative error from criminality: “If these deficiencies were the result of intentional action, it would be a violation of federal law regardless of whether the failure to retain records or the deprivation of a fair tabulation of a vote was outcome determinative for any particular election or race.” The filing also references federal statutes covering the preservation of election records and laws that criminalize deprivation of a fair election process, describing the retention requirement as a potential misdemeanor and the deprivation statute as a potential felony.

The document acknowledges that some post‑2020 allegations already have been disproven while others have been substantiated, including through admissions by Fulton County. The county’s public response emphasized legal pushback and continuity in election work: “Fulton County will continue to pursue every legal option to seek the return of election records and to defend our elections from possible takeover,” Pitts said. “Even in the midst of this unprecedented legal action, we will not allow our staff to be deterred or distracted from preparations for the 2026 election, which will be once again free, fair, transparent and legally compliant.”

Beyond the immediate legal stakes, the raid and the unsealed affidavit deepen fractures in public trust that carry public health and equity consequences. Election workers and community members in Fulton County, a diverse metropolitan jurisdiction where access to government services and health resources already varies across neighborhoods, may face heightened stress and reduced confidence in civic institutions. Disruption to local election administration also risks diverting staff and resources from community outreach and programs that affect health and social services, particularly in historically underrepresented communities.

Investigators have signaled they are seeking to resolve whether procedural shortcomings were innocent or criminal; the affidavit establishes probable cause for the searches but does not equate to proof of criminal conduct. Officials and courts will have to reconcile outstanding questions about the scope of materials seized, the exact execution date and any next legal steps.