The Special Grand Jury Report on the Atlanta Counties Investigation of the 2016 Presidential Telephone Call from the Trump – J/Tay Park Correspondence
It will be the clearest look yet into the two-year investigation into Trump and his associates, after portions of the report by the Atlanta area special grand jury are released Thursday.
The introduction and conclusion will be public on Thursday, along with the panel’s concerns about witnesses lying under oath. Some information in those sections could be redacted by McBurney.
The question is if the portions will include any new information that will shed new light on what Trump did in the past or if the grand jury decided that he committed no crimes.
Over time, the investigation expanded well beyond the Trump phone call to include false claims of election fraud to state lawmakers, the fake elector scheme, efforts by unauthorized individuals to access voting machines in one Georgia county as well as threats and harassment against election workers. BJay Park left his position as the US attorney for the Northern District of Georgia.
Trump lost to Joe Biden in Georgia by nearly 12,000 votes in 2020. The former president said there wasn’t anything problematic about his activities during the election.
Cunningham told CNN that there was absolutely no doubt that the conduct that was referred to is done on Donald Trump’s behalf.
“That would tell us that this cross section of citizens, having spent nine months working hard at this, has concluded that at least some of what was done on behalf of the former president to overturn the election results was a crime,” he said. I think that is significant.
The Georgia probe was set off nearly two years ago by an hourlong January 2021 phone call from Trump to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to “find” the votes necessary for Trump to win the Peach State. Trump has referred to it as a “perfect” phone call.
The special grand jury, barred from issuing indictments, penned their final report as a culmination of its seven months of work, which included interviewing 75 witnesses, from Giuliani to Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham.
Its final report is likely to include some summary of the panel’s investigative work, as well as any recommendations for indictments and the alleged conduct that led the panel to its conclusions.
Since the special grand jury has presented its findings, there is a second grand jury in Fulton County which can make decisions about whether to charge anyone.
She suggested that the special grand jury had recommended multiple indictments and that her decision on whether to bring charges is imminent.
Georgia felonies like solicitation of election fraud in the first degree and related general crimes like conspiracy to commit election fraud, can be charged with narrow charges. Also included in that list are people who had direct contact with Georgia, like his former chief of staff Mark Meadows, and his attorneys. The case would focus on activities around the fake electoral slates in December of 2020, followed by conversation with Mr. Raffensperger in Jan. 2, rooting it in Georgia and avoiding events nationally.
A more narrow case might make slightly more sense: Given the extraordinary circumstances around it, Ms. Willis will surely have her hands full. And it will feature a likely lead defendant who has demonstrated his propensity for legal circuses — coming in the midst of a heated political season no less.
Ms. Willis has a tendency to win RICO cases. Sometimes juries are more attentive to grand narratives that command their attention and outrage, as we have learned from our criminal trial work.
Pretrial Motions, Appeals, and the Cases of U.S. v. Donaldson and Donaldson in the Next Two Years
Whether it’s simple or broad, if a case is opened, one thing is nearly certain: It is likely to take the better part of the next two years. There would be lots of legal filings from Mr. Trump, but they would take time. Here the battle would likely be waged around pretrial motions and appeals by Mr. Trump arguing, as he has done in other cases, that he was acting in his official presidential capacity and so is immune.
Even if the courts work at the relatively rapid pace of other high-profile presidential cases, we would still be talking about months of delay. In both U.S. v. Nixon and Thompson v. Trump, about three months were consumed from the first filing of the cases to the final rejection of presidential arguments by the U.S. Supreme Court. There would be more issues in this case and it would likely take more time. At the earliest, Ms. Willis would be looking at a trial toward the end of 2023. The appeals would not be concluded until the end of the century.