Appeal Court Decision In the Georgia election investigation, Lindsey Graham must appear.
A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham must appear before a special grand jury looking into whether former President Donald Trump and others attempted to improperly influence the Georgia 2020 race.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge decision The Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is given permission by the Circuit Court of Appeals to interrogate Graham. She wants to question the South Carolina Republican on calls he made to Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, in the weeks following the election.
Graham allegedly asked Raffensperger if he had the authority to void specific absentee ballots, which Raffensperger interpreted as a call to nullify legitimately cast ballots. Graham called the interpretation “crazy” and rejected it.
Graham could challenge the decision before the entire appellate court. An attorney representing Graham referred questions about the decision on Thursday to the senator’s office, which did not immediately respond.
Graham objected to the subpoena, claiming that as a senator of the United States, he was exempt from testifying in the state’s probe. He also said he did nothing wrong. Graham “has failed to demonstrate that this strategy will violate his rights under the Speech and Debate Clause,” the judges concluded in a six-page opinion.
Willis started the probe at the beginning of last year, soon after a transcript of a phone discussion between Trump and Raffensperger from January 2021 was public. Raffensperger could “find” the votes required to reverse his close loss to Democrat Joe Biden, according to Trump’s claim during the call.
Willis asked for a special grand jury, claiming that the panel’s ability to issue subpoenas would enable the questioning of individuals who would not otherwise participate in the probe. Since then, she has repeatedly petitioned the court to order the testimony of intimate Trump advisers and acquaintances.
According to a source acquainted with Pat Cipollone’s testimony who spoke to The Associated Press on Thursday under the condition of anonymity to discuss a private appearance, some of those associates include the former White House attorney, who has appeared before the special grand jury. The first to report on Cipollone’s appearance was CNN.
Cipollone vehemently fought attempts to overturn the election and stated that he did not think there was enough fraud to have changed the outcome of the contest that Biden won.
In a series of petitions submitted to the court in early July, Willis sought to compel the testimony of the first group of Trump associates, including Graham. In federal court, he contested the subpoena, but the U.S. Leigh Martin May, the district judge, refused to throw out his subpoena. Graham next made a request to the 11th U.S. Appeals court for the circuit.
Attorneys for Graham claimed that the U.S. He is exempt from testifying under the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which prevents members of Congress from having to respond to inquiries about legislative activities. He argues that because he was seeking information to help him make decisions about voting to certify the 2020 election and upcoming legislation, the call he made to Raffensperger yesterday was protected.
In a series of petitions submitted to the court in early July, Willis sought to compel the testimony of the first group of Trump associates, including Graham. In federal court, he contested the subpoena, but the U.S. Leigh Martin May, the district judge, refused to throw out his subpoena. Graham next made a request to the 11th U.S. Appeals court for the circuit.
Attorneys for Graham claimed that the U.S. He is exempt from testifying under the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which prevents members of Congress from having to respond to inquiries about legislative activities. He argues that because he was seeking information to help him make decisions about voting to certify the 2020 election and upcoming legislation, the call he made to Raffensperger yesterday was protected.
Willis’ legal team stated that Raffensperger’s words and statements Graham made at the time in press interviews prove the senator was driven by politics rather than legislative fact-finding.
They also contended that a number of other issues outside of the Raffensperger call are covered by the special grand jury’s inquiry. They also want to know if Graham talked or collaborated with Trump and his campaign over efforts to rig Georgia and other election outcomes, as well as whether he was briefed by the Trump team on the Trump-Raffensperger phone call.
Additionally, Graham’s attorneys claimed that the concept of “sovereign immunity” shields a senator from being called in for questioning by a state prosecutor.
Graham’s attorneys claimed that even if the speech or debate clause or sovereign immunity did not apply, his position as a “high-ranking official” exempts him from testifying. They contended that this is the case since Willis has not demonstrated the necessity of his testimony or the exclusivity of the data he would offer.
The appellate judges concluded on Thursday that Willis might “ask about non-investigatory activity that is within the scope of the subpoena” but “may not ask about any investigatory conduct,” adding that Graham could bring up any concerns he had during his questioning.
The special grand jury has previously heard testimony from others. Rudy Giuliani, a former mayor of New York and Trump’s lawyer, testified in August despite being informed that he would be charged with a crime in connection with the investigation. The panel has also seen the attorneys John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro in person.
The former White House head of staff Mark Meadows, former national security advisor Michael Flynn, and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich have all filed paperwork requesting their testimony.
