“A Significant Public Reaction”
District Attorney Fani Willis Ups the Ante on Trump
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution broke a major story on Monday in one of the main criminal investigations surrounding ex-president Donald Trump. Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis has issued a timetable to local law enforcement asking them to be ready for “heightened security” because her announcement of indictments, due sometime between July 11 and September 1, “may provoke a significant public reaction.”
Paired with earlier statements by the investigative grand jury foreperson that the names of individuals whom the panel recommended be indicted would not come as a shock, there is now widespread assumption that, sometime this summer, Willis intends to indict Trump, along with others, on state charges related to his efforts to interfere with the 2020 election in Georgia.
When news of the letter and Willis’s timetable hit, many readers had the same questions. These include the following:
Why the delay? What the hell is taking so long?
What’s going on with some of the defendants and their lawyer?
Why give Trump a heads up instead of just indicting him?
What will the indictment likely contain?
What’s with the weird timeline starting July 11 and going to September 1?
Let’s walk through each of these so we can take in the whole situation with greater clarity.
Why the delay? What the hell is taking so long?
In late January, when the investigative grand jury had completed its report, Willis made a statement to the Court that got everyone excited. She told the Court that it should not publicly release an unredacted report of the grand jury because charging decisions were “imminent” and it could affect defendants unfairly.
Willis clearly has a different idea of the word “imminent” than the rest of us. Here it is, three months later, and no charging decisions have been made, at least not publicly.
But let’s look at what happened shortly after she delivered that statement. First, even though the judge agreed and withheld the report, except for a few provisions, the grand jury foreperson went on record (and on television) not long afterwards to strongly indicate that the indictments would include ex-president Trump. The foreperson was widely seen as a rather unserious person, and while she didn’t violate the judge’s order on confidentiality, she walked right up to the line with her comments.
That was enough for Trump’s lawyers to file a motion to quash the entire grand jury report. They also filed a motion to have another judge hear the matter, citing the “propriety” of the presiding judge’s conduct. The court set a timeline allowing Willis’s office to respond in early May. That pretty much stopped forward progress on any indictment announcements.
Meanwhile, as discussed further below, Willis’s team recently learned that a big batch of the defendants never received the immunity offers that her office had made via their attorney. Willis has since moved to disqualify that attorney on grounds of misconduct and conflict of interest, and that motion is also now pending. If Willis succeeds, the defendants will obtain new counsel, and some of them may agree to become cooperating witnesses in exchange for immunity or leniency. That is a big deal and warrants some extra time.
Finally, as discussed in the final section below, Willis needs to abide by the court’s term schedule when it comes to empaneled grand juries. This is rather like having to wait for the next train at the station; she can’t realistically get on one that has already left the station, and even if she tried to do so, she may run out of time to present her case.
What’s going on with some of the defendants and their lawyer?
There’s an important group of 10 defendants who were part of a slate of 16 illegal “electors.” Those fake electors sought in January 2021 to present themselves as the legitimate batch for the state of Georgia. They signed affidavits attesting to this, and they met as a group in order to present the false certificate in time for the electoral count in Congress on January 6, 2021. These 10 bogus electors are represented by the same attorney, Kimberly B. Debrow.
During the course of the investigation, Willis’s office presented Debrow (along with another attorney, Holly Pierson, who represents a different defendant) with offers of immunity for their clients. Such immunity would be in exchange for testimony about the fake elector scheme and other parts of the election interference conspiracy. But Willis recently learned from some of the fake electors that this offer was supposedly never passed along even after it was made last year.
The lawyers claim that they had spoken to their clients but that none of them was interested, so there’s a bit of a she said / she said happening.
One of the bogus electors not represented by Debrow or Pierson already has an immunity deal in place and is cooperating. Other electors are reportedly now seeking deals. And there’s another wrinkle: According to prosecutors, during a recent discussion some of the fake electors represented by Debrow claimed that another fake elector, whom she also represents, broke the law, while the other defendants were not party to that illegal act. That sets up a potential conflict of interest for Debrow in representing all of the defendants because some are now making accusations against others.
Willis is right to let this play out, certainly past the motion to disqualify Debrow, to see if she can wring further cooperation out of this group.
Why give Trump a heads up instead of just indicting him?
There are many considerations here. Top of mind for me is this: Willis has had the benefit of watching things unfold in Manhattan, and she has learned from DA Bragg’s experience. Before the grand jury returned an indictment in Manhattan, Trump announced (falsely) that he was going to be arrested “on Tuesday.” The media went into a frenzy, law enforcement had to scramble, and Trump raised millions of dollars. When his “arrest” day didn’t happen, Trump used it to cast doubt on whether the grand jury would even return an indictment.
The Georgia case presents a far more sprawling and involved set of possible charges involving high level Trump allies as well as leading state GOP officials. Trump and his cronies in Congress already have politicized Bragg’s straightforward false business records case and have even begun running federal level interference with subpoenas from Congress. But that was likely only a preview of what we will endure when some dozen defendants, including Trump, face far more serious charges around a bitterly contested national election. Willis is wise to proceed carefully, or she could easily get tied up in a federal battle on top of her case.
Willis also knows that her window for indictment is somewhere between July 11 and September 1 (more on that below), so by signaling that she will act in that time period, she takes the air out of Trump’s sails a bit in the interim. Trump can of course claim, as he did before, that he is about to be indicted, but the window here is so large that he will just be speculating. The public and even his supporters might not take him as seriously because he has lied about this before.
The announcement also starts the countdown clock for any defendants who are considering flipping in exchange for immunity. If any of them want to save their own hides, they should do so soon. As any good defense lawyer will tell you, if you’re going to flip, do it early because the first cooperators get the best deals. The offers grow worse for those who hold out as their cooperation and information grows less valuable to the prosecution. To prepare for indictments this summer, prosecutors are going to want to start conducting interviews of cooperating witnesses very soon.
Finally, this announcement gives plenty of heads up to law enforcement to schedule around an impending arrest. Sick days, vacation days and summer schedules for police forces can prove tricky, particularly if Trump intends to rally hundreds or even thousands of his supporters to his side. Those more violent and extreme MAGA supporters are less likely to come to make trouble if they know that the authorities will be ready and waiting.
What will the indictments likely contain?
Georgia state law makes it illegal to interfere with elections in the state, and there is a great deal of evidence that Trump and his cronies did just that—not the least of which were telephone calls made by Trump asking state officials like Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” votes and swing the election to him.
But direct pressure by Trump on state election officials was only one part of what went on. Prior to those calls, Trump campaign leaders and his allies, including Rudy Giuliani, went to Georgia to intentionally spread false claims of election fraud. There were threats and intimidation of state election workers, as well as a facially illegal creation of a fake set of electors, all done at the direction of Trump and his top aides.
Then there is the possible charge of racketeering, meaning the Trump campaign was acting as a criminal enterprise to commit certain illegal acts. Willis has experience in RICO-style prosecutions and has brought in a top expert to look into whether the actions of the defendants rose to that level.
Any way you slice it, there are very serious crimes at issue, and convictions on them carry high possible sentences. Her indictments likely will be sweeping, complex and damning.
What’s with the weird timeline starting July 11?
The court in Fulton County conducts its business in “terms.” That includes grand juries, with the fourth term beginning, as you might guess, July 11 and ending September 1. Willis knows that it’s too late to present to the current sitting grand jury, with motions still pending and witnesses still to interview. If she tried to do that, she might run out of time.
It’s also not clear, at least yet, whether she will be able to present the entire investigative grand jury recommendation report without issue, or if Trump’s motion to quash it will mean she has to present the entire case or part of it again. While this seems unlikely, it would be foolish to simply assume Trump will lose his motion. Also, Trump is seeking as an initial matter to disqualify the judge from hearing the motion, meaning if he loses that motion he has more grounds for appeal. Willis needs to factor that possibility in as well.
Viewed with all this in mind, in my personal estimation Willis has made a responsible decision to aim for the fourth court term and grand jury service beginning July 11. That will give her plenty of time to present a summary of the case, the most relevant testimony, and the recommendations of the existing report in order to obtain indictments. Assuming she has new witnesses to present, due to immunity or leniency deals recently struck, she also will have time to bring those witnesses back in to testify.
As someone who has worked on many large, sprawling cases, I understand that delay is nearly inevitable, especially if the other side’s whole goal is to cause it. This is doubly true if the other side is well-funded and fully lawyered-up. Add to this the national scrutiny on this case, and the risk that any public misstep will serve as an excuse for the Georgia legislature to move against Willis next year under its new removal law for prosecutors, and it is quite understandable that she would want to proceed with the utmost care and caution.
At least now we have a clearer timeline than before, and we are fairly sure of the result. Trump also has this now hanging over his head and possibly keeping him up at night, especially given that there are still two federal grand juries currently investigating a host of other crimes.
Expect a significant public reaction from Trump when the indictments finally drop this summer.
Thank you for detailing this all out in an organized manner so we can understand. There’s so much noise it’s hard to filter. I appreciate you!!!
Thanks for the in depth look at this. Especially the ‘weird’ time thing. The entire thing makes more sense to me now. Gonna be one hot summer in Georgia.