A special grand jury that provided recommendations earlier this year to Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis, regarding who to charge in the inquiry into former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election in the state, made around 20 additional suggestions on who to indict — including current U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina).
The names of people who had been recommended but not charged were revealed on Friday following a court order late last month that said the 26-page report should be released to the public.
The recommendations by the special grand jury were made in January of this year. Willis ultimately issued charges against Trump and 17 of his allies on August 14, which include violations of the state’s racketeering law and other statutes relating to pressuring state officials to change the result of an election.
The special grand jury, which can recommend charges against individuals but does not have the power to issue indictments, was requested by Willis ahead of a standard grand jury in order for her to compel testimony from witnesses who could have refused to testify without a subpoena order.
The Fulton County inquiry was initially spurred on by revelations of a January 2021 phone conversation between Trump and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R-Georgia), in which the former president tried to pressure the state’s top election official to overturn now-President Joe Biden’s win in Georgia.
Graham himself testified to the special grand jury last year about phone conversations with Raffensperger, though he tried (and failed) to contest the subpoena order compelling him to do so. Those conversations took place before the infamous Trump call, shortly after the 2020 presidential race was called for Biden, in mid-November 2020.
Raffensperger has said he felt as though Graham was pressuring him to help Trump, as the South Carolina senator, who has no legal authority in Georgia, asked Raffensperger if he had the power to toss out all absentee ballots in counties that had higher rates of envelope signatures that didn’t match state records. Graham has alleged that his calls weren’t part of a pressure campaign, but rather were “investigatory” to help inform his vote during the certification ceremony of the Electoral College.
In addition to Graham, two former Republican U.S. senators from Georgia who were still in office at the time — Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue — were also recommended for charges by the special grand jury.
Ultimately, Willis decided against charging Graham, Loeffler, Perdue and over a dozen other individuals who the special grand jury had said deserved to be charged. Her reasoning for this decision is unclear, but Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent and a legal contributor to ABC News, posited on X that had Willis done so, it would have opened the investigation to congressional oversight — including to House Judiciary chair Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who has demanded to see records of the case.
“Seeing lots of news reports highlighting that D.A. Fani Willis did not indict U.S. senators despite special grand jury recommendations. Doing so would have 1) [created] potential constitutional hurdles and 2) would give folks like Jim Jordan a clear ‘hook’ to do what he’s doing now,” Rangappa wrote.
In a letter dated this week to Jordan, Willis said she would not comply with his demands to review her records regarding the charges she did issue, stating that his request was a blatant means to “obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding and to advance outrageous misrepresentations” about the case on Trump’s behalf.
“There is no justification in the Constitution for Congress to interfere with a state criminal matter, as you attempt to do,” Willis added.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.