Home What's Wrong What Is Wrong with Lindsey Graham? Graham Must Testify in The Georgia 2020 Inquiry, According to A Federal Judge

What Is Wrong with Lindsey Graham? Graham Must Testify in The Georgia 2020 Inquiry, According to A Federal Judge

0
What Is Wrong with Lindsey Graham? Graham Must Testify in The Georgia 2020 Inquiry, According to A Federal Judge
GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham’s request to have a subpoena quashed was declined by an Atlanta federal judge, who ordered him to appear before a grand jury in Fulton County looking into former President Donald Trump’s attempts to rig Georgia’s 2020 presidential election.
Graham’s counsel contended that the “Speech or Debate” section of the US Constitution shielded the US senator from having to testify in this case, and on Monday, US District Judge Leigh Martin May agreed, sending the case to the Superior Court of Fulton County to hear further proceedings.
The case was remanded to the Superior Court of Fulton County for additional proceedings “because the record must be more fully developed before the Court can address the applicability of the ‘Speech or Debate clause to specific questions or lines of inquiry, and because Senator Graham’s only request in removing the subpoena to this Court was to quash the subpoena in its entirety,” May wrote in the decision.

On August 23, the South Carolina Republican is due to testify before the special grand jury in Atlanta.

what is wrong with lindsey graham

The District Attorney’s office has demonstrated “extraordinary circumstances and a special need for Senator Graham’s testimony on issues relating to allegations of attempts to influence or disrupt the lawful administration of Georgia’s 2020 elections,” May wrote in her ruling. She also noted that there are “considerable areas of inquiry” that are not “legislative in nature.”
The special purpose grand jury has also issued subpoenas to five additional attorneys who worked for Trump and communicated with Georgia election officials in the days following the 2020 election. At least three of these attorneys are attempting to challenge their subpoenas in state courts this week.

The Graham Team Claims that The Acts Were Appropriate.

After the 2020 election, Graham made calls to Georgian officials, according to Graham’s legal team, which constituted legislative activity and was directly relevant to his duties as the Senate Judiciary Committee’s chairman at the time.
Graham’s legal team said in court documents that the subpoena “implicates Senator Graham’s legislative acts and must, therefore, be quashed.”
In court last Wednesday, Graham’s attorney Brian Lea claimed that the senator shouldn’t be coerced into testifying. He said, “We shouldn’t be playing whack-a-mole with the District Attorney.” Lea said that “they have proved nothing other than un-sided claims,” and that “constitutional immunity” cannot be breached “for a fishing expedition.”

Secretary of State of Georgia Claims Pressure Campaign

what is wrong with lindsey graham

The first witness to give a statement in front of the special purpose grand jury in May was Raffensperger, the top election official of Georgia who is up for reelection in November. In November 2020, he revealed to CNN that Graham had suggested that Raffensperger attempt to throw away some Georgia ballots during a state-wide examination.
Raffensperger recalled the incident to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on “The Situation Room” at the time. “He inquired if the ballots could be traced back to the voters.” And then, he said, “I got the impression that it meant that you may then throw those out for any, if you look at the counties with the highest frequent inaccuracy of signatures. Thus, that’s the impression I had.

Raffensperger Continued, “it Was Just an Indication Of, ‘look Hard and See How Many Ballots You Could Toss Out.

Graham responded to a question from CNN at the time, “That’s crazy,” when asked if he was trying to get the secretary of state to reject valid ballots. Graham stated that he was researching the process used to confirm signatures on mail-in votes for several competitive states.
The investigation’s extensive reach has been described by Willis, who claims that it could look into allegations of “election fraud solicitation, making false statements to state and local governmental bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, breach of oath of office, and any involvement in violence or threats related to the administration of the election.”