Georgia

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Power move: Stacey Abrams’ next act is the electrification of the US

      by

      Stacey Abrams has been hailed as a masterly community organizer, after she helped turn out the voters that secured two Senate seats for Democrats in once solidly red Georgia. She has also run twice – unsuccessfully – for state governor. For her next move, she’s not focusing on electoral power so much as power itself.Recently she left the world of campaign politics and took a job as senior counsel for the non-profit Rewiring America. Her role will focus on helping thousands of people across America wean their homes and businesses off fossil fuels and on to electricity, at a moment when scientists have given a “final warning” about the need to curb greenhouse gas emissions and prevent global catastrophe.“We are at an inflection point where we can choose to electrify,” she said in an interview. “We don’t have to do it everywhere, all at once. If you want to see what the future looks like, we start building it here and now.”The impetus for her role comes from significant moves taken by the Biden administration. When he signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) last year, President Joe Biden hailed it as “the biggest step forward on climate ever”. It includes a sprawling array of tax credits, rebates and other incentives to help people electrify their lives.“The government has basically filled a bank account for you with thousands of dollars that will help you go electric,” Abrams said.Her mission is to help people access that so-called bank account.“You can improve your indoor air quality, make cooking quick and easy, make being cool in the summer and warm in the winter, and be more affordable,” Abrams said. “But we have to talk about it.”Abrams is perhaps best known for registering 800,000 voters in Georgia through her voting rights advocacy organization Fair Fight Action. She wants to use a similar playbook with electrification, and doing so could benefit many of the same people whose voices risked going unheard in elections.Low-income communities and communities of color have long had to contend with polluting, inefficient appliances. This has an impact on public health by increasing the risk of asthma and leads to higher utility bills that take a bigger bite out of households’ income. The IRA takes aim at some of those wrongs, with tax credits and rebates that can help those households swap in heat pumps, induction stoves and electric vehicles for their gas-powered counterparts.But figuring out what incentives you qualify for and how to access them can be involved, to say the least. While Rewiring America has a calculator that lets individuals suss out what IRA benefits they can snag, Abrams will be taking that and other tools to the community level. She highlighted how houses of worship could be prime places to talk about the IRA and a potential target for outreach.And she hopes to work with local leaders such as teachers, mayors and city council members to make the IRA a kitchen table issue. Enlisting them will, she hopes, eventually lead to neighbors talking to neighbors about how much money they saved on a new induction stove or how much more comfortable their home was during a heatwave thanks to a newly installed heat pump.“You meet people where they are, not where you want them to be,” she said. “That means understanding the lives they’re living and the questions they have and who they go to to talk about their questions.”While the IRA has the potential to be transformative, it’s also not enough to electrify every household in the country. The law has billions set aside for home upgrades, but more resources will be needed to achieve the Biden administration’s goal of reducing US emissions up to 52% below 2005 levels by the end of the decade.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAn analysis by the Rhodium Group found the law has the potential to cut emissions by up to 42%. And that it could reduce home energy bills by $717 to $1,146 by 2030.Abrams said that, based on her experience in the arena of voting rights, the prospect of such benefits could help foster an electrification movement. “As people get more, they expect more,” she said. “The most sustainable movement is when people expect more and are willing to work for more.”This isn’t Abrams’ first foray into climate. She was quick to point out her college senior thesis was on environmental justice and that she interned with the Environmental Protection Agency. During her tenure in the Georgia house of representatives, she also worked as minority leader to help pass a bill that included the state’s biggest influx of cash for public transportation.Ultimately, the Biden administration wants the US to reach net zero by mid-century. It might be hard to imagine that occurring – a distant future, when perhaps technologies that are only nascent today like carbon dioxide removal will be more widespread, almost every car and home will be electric, and the inequalities targeted by the IRA and Biden’s executive orders will have dwindled.That scenario can read a bit like science fiction – a genre of which Abrams is a well-known fan.“In almost every sci-fi story, it begins with what decisions people are making long before the story takes place,” she said. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Georgia Lawyers Seek to Quash Special Grand Jury Report

      by

      In a motion filed on Monday, the lawyers ask that the Fulton County district attorney’s office be recused from the criminal investigation into election interference in the state in 2020.ATLANTA — Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump filed a motion in a Georgia court on Monday seeking to quash the final report of a special grand jury that investigated whether Mr. Trump and some of his allies interfered in the 2020 election results in Georgia. The motion also seeks to “preclude the use of any evidence derived” from the report, and asks that the office of Fani T. Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, be recused from the case.The move comes as Mr. Trump has started pushing back more broadly against several criminal investigations into his conduct. Over the weekend, Mr. Trump said in a social media post that he would be arrested on Tuesday as part of an investigation by the Manhattan district attorney into a hush money payment he made to to a porn actress, and called on his supporters to protest.In Georgia, Mr. Trump is seen as having two main areas of legal jeopardy: the calls he made in the weeks after the 2020 election to pressure state officials to overturn the results there, and his direct involvement in efforts to assemble an alternate slate of electors, even after three vote counts affirmed President Biden’s victory in the state. Experts have said that Ms. Willis appears to be building a case that could target multiple defendants with charges of conspiracy to commit election fraud or charges related to racketeering.Notice of the filing appeared in the official court docket on Monday morning, but the filing itself was not yet public, so the lawyers’ reasoning was not yet clear. Mr. Findling acknowledged that he had filed it on Mr. Trump’s behalf, along with Ms. Little and another lawyer from Mr. Findling’s firm, Marissa Goldberg.Last month, Mr. Trump’s lawyers in the Georgia case, Drew Findling and Jennifer Little, said that the forewoman of the special grand jury in Fulton County had “poisoned” the inquiry there by granting a number of media interviews in which she discussed details of the jury’s work. Last week, five other jurors discussed aspects of their work in an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.The Fulton County special grand jury was sworn in last May and met behind closed doors for months, hearing testimony from 75 witnesses. It did not have the power to issue indictments; rather, it produced a report containing recommendations on whether and whom to indict. Portions of the report were released in January, but key sections remain under seal, including those detailing which people the jury believes should be indicted, and for what crimes.Drew Findling, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, in Atlanta in 2021.Alyssa Pointer/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, via Associated PressIn interviews late last month with a number of news outlets, the forewoman, Emily Kohrs, did not divulge specific details of the jury’s recommendations, although she told The New York Times that the jury had recommended indictments for more than a dozen people. Asked if Mr. Trump was among them, she said: “You’re not going to be shocked. It’s not rocket science.”In her round of interviews, Ms. Kohrs, 30, said she was trying to carefully follow rules set out by the judge presiding over the case, Robert C.I. McBurney of Fulton County Superior Court. Judge McBurney has not barred the jurors from talking, though he told them not to discuss their deliberations.Lawyers for Mr. Trump argued after Ms. Kohrs spoke publicly that in discussing the case, she had divulged a number of matters that they believed constituted “deliberations.” Judge McBurney, however, noted at the time, in an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, that “deliberations” only covered discussions they had privately in the jury room. Other aspects of their work could be discussed publicly, he said.Even given this leeway, the six jurors who have spoken with news outlets have played it conservatively, declining to discuss whom they had singled out as meriting indictment.In some of Ms. Kohrs’s television news interviews, she sometimes used light and playful language, prompting some critics to charge that the grand jury’s deliberations seemed to have lacked the gravity befitting a criminal inquiry into a former president. Ms. Kohrs was even the subject of a “Saturday Night Live” skit.But some legal experts said they doubted whether Ms. Kohrs’s comments would have much of an impact on the Georgia case. Any criminal indictments would be issued by a regular grand jury.Mr. Trump announced a new presidential campaign in November, and he is leading his Republican opponents in most polls. But his legal troubles present him with challenges that have few, if any, precedents in American history. No president, sitting or former, has ever been charged with a crime.Before his public statements this weekend anticipating an imminent indictment in New York, Mr. Trump had sent out numerous fund-raising emails criticizing prosecutors in the various cases against him and portraying him as a victim of partisan forces. “The Left has turned America into the ‘Investigation Capital of the World,’ as our country’s enemies brilliantly plot their next move to destroy our nation,” he stated in one such email on March 13.The New York investigation is being led by Manhattan’s district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg. Prosecutors working in Mr. Bragg’s office have indeed signaled that an indictment of Mr. Trump could be imminent. Mr. Trump’s declaration that he would be arrested on Tuesday appears to involve guesswork on his part, however; after his post on his Truth Social website, a spokesperson issued a statement saying that Mr. Trump did not have direct knowledge of the timing of any arrest. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s legal woes pick up speed as Republican 2024 race heats up

      by

      As Donald Trump runs again for the White House, he’s dogged by four criminal investigations that have gained momentum, including two focused on Trump’s zealous drive to overturn his 2020 election loss, raising the odds he will face charges in one or more inquiries in coming weeks or months, say former federal prosecutors.All four inquiries have accelerated in recent months with numerous subpoenas to close Trump associates and testimony by key witnesses before grand juries in Washington DC, Georgia and New York, that pose growing legal threats to Trump, plus several of his ex-lawyers and allies.Two investigations are homing in on Trump’s nonstop efforts to thwart his 2020 election loss with bogus fraud charges, while others are looking into Trump’s retention of hundreds of classified documents post his presidency, and Trump’s role in a $130,000 hush money payment in 2016 to porn star Stormy Daniels with whom he allegedly had an affair.An indictment of Trump in the Daniels hush money case could even come within days. Trump’s fears over the issue even prompted him to post on social media about being arrested this week in New York, triggering a flood of Republicans to issue statements of support despite Trump calling for protests against any such move.The four inquiries have been examining separately whether Trump violated several laws including obstruction of an official proceeding and defrauding the United States by his actions to overturn the 2020 election, and breaking other statutes.The multiple investigations of Trump, two of which are being led by justice department special counsel Jack Smith, are unparalleled for an ex president – especially as he seeks the White House again, say ex-prosecutors.“It seems quite possible, or even likely, that Trump will be defending himself in four different criminal cases as he is campaigning for president in 2024,” said Barbara McQuade, former US attorney for eastern Michigan. “Making court appearances in New York, Georgia, Florida and Washington DC while also maintaining a campaign schedule may prove to be a daunting task.”McQuade added: “Trump, no doubt, will use criminal charges as a fundraising tool and as a way to portray himself as the eternal victim. On some level, he may relish the spectacle of it all, but it seems likely that accountability is headed his way.”Other ex-prosecutors say Trump’s legal travails are unique for a presidential candidate.“The sheer number and diversity of criminal investigations of Trump’s conduct are totally unprecedented for a major candidate in modern times,” said Dan Richman, a Columbia University law professor and ex-prosecutor in New York southern district.The criminal inquiry by the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, into Trump’s efforts to reverse his 2020 defeat in Georgia with his high-pressure call to the secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, on 2 January 2021 asking him to “find 11,780 votes”, and other calls, is expected to bring charges against him and some close allies in coming months, say ex-prosecutors.In late January, Willis said a special grand jury had completed a seven-month inquiry involving interviews with 75 witnesses in her investigation which reportedly had at least 17 targets, including Trump and his former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.A number of indictments have reportedly been recommended by the special grand jury, and Willis has said a decision is “imminent” about convening a regular grand jury that Georgia law requires before she brings any charges.Separately, Smith’s inquiry into Trump’s drive to thwart Joe Biden’s election seems to be in its late stages, in light of subpoenas this year to former vice-president Mike Pence and Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows, both potentially key witnesses to Trump’s drive to block Biden from taking office. Ex-prosecutors say Meadows is a subject of the investigation.Those subpoenas “show that the January 6 investigation is serious and narrowing,” said Paul Pelletier, former acting chief of the justice department’s fraud section.Smith has secured grand jury testimony from other key figures including Pence’s former top aide Marc Short and his former chief counsel Greg Jacob, plus former White House counsel Pat Cipollone as part of his inquiry into whether Trump’s actions before and during 6 January 2021 violated an official proceeding and defrauded the government.On another legal front, Smith has also been leading a wide ranging inquiry into Trump’s retention of hundreds of classified documents at Mar a Lago after he left the White House, a potential violation of three laws – the Presidential Records Act, obstruction and the Espionage Act.Meanwhile, a grand jury convened by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, to look into Trump’s alleged arranging hush money payments of $130,000 via his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen to Daniels in 2016, heard testimony from Cohen this week.Last week, Trump declined an invitation by the DA’s office to testify, a sign reportedly that he could soon be indicted.Trump has blasted all the investigations as politically motivated and said he’s done nothing illegal, decrying Smith’s appointment as “part of a never ending witch-hunt”.But ex-prosecutors see huge legal headaches ahead for Trump, and probable charges at least in the Georgia invsstigation.“With the Manhattan DA now presenting evidence to a grand jury, Trump now faces four credible criminal investigations – unprecedented for the most hardened criminals, never mind a former president who is seeking to enter the White House again,” Pelletier said.“Of all the investigations, Georgia appears likely to bring the most serious charges imminently against Trump. The Mar-a-Lago document investigation has picked up speed, but, frustratingly, appears to be on a more cautious and deliberate track.”Other former federal prosecutors see strong signs that in Georgia charges against Trump, and some of his top lawyers and allies are coming.“There is little doubt that a number of indictments are on the horizon in Georgia. My sense is that the Fulton county DA is putting the final touches on bringing Rico [racketeering] charges involving Trump and others” said former US attorney Michael Moore, of Georgia.“Trump will surely be the main player, and I expect to see some well-known names in upcoming indictments,” adding that Trump, as well as Meadows and Giuliani “are likely to each see more of the inside of a courtroom than any of them might like”.Trump has dubbed his call to Raffensperger as “perfect”.Moore noted: “There will be an unavoidable overlap of efforts by the Fulton DA and the special counsel. The efforts to overturn the 2020 election had both state and federal implications even while dealing with the same facts.“The ability of the special counsel to delve into conduct across many jurisdictions may prove especially useful when looking at the efforts to string together the fake electors schemes in multiple states,” referring to a scheme the justice department has focused on involving efforts by Giuliani and others to replace electors in key states Biden won with Trump electors.Other ex-prosecutors note significant overlap between the Georgia probe investigation and the special counsel’s, both of which threaten Trump, Giuliani, ex-Trump lawyer John Eastman and others.“While Trump’s calls to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and other Georgia state officials appear to be at the center of the Fulton county DA’s probe, that investigation likely extends to efforts by Trump’s legal team, including Rudy Giuliani, to convince Georgia legislators to overturn the election results,” said Richman.“Yet the legal team’s nationwide efforts by Giuliani, Eastman and others – encouraged by Trump to an extent that will need to be clarified – to present slates of phony electors to Congress and to otherwise disrupt the electoral certification also seems to be at the heart of one prong of Jack Smith’s federal investigation.”Not surprisingly, Trump’s legal expenses to fend off these investigations and other legal headaches involving personal and corporate matters have been hefty.According to federal records, Trump spent about $10m last year out of his political action committee to pay law firms representing him in the four criminal inquiries, plus cases involving the Trump Organization and lawsuits.Those costs will surely mount for Trump as the investigations ratchet up subpoenas of top former Trump allies to build their cases before grand juries, as Smith has been doing in the two inquiries he’s spearheading.“Prosecutors tend to conduct investigations in concentric circles, starting at the outer edges and then progressing ever inward with the target at the center,” McQuade said. “They want to arm themselves with as much information as possible when they question those who are closest to the target. Now that Smith is serving subpoenas on Meadows and Pence, it seems that he has entered the final circle of his investigation.”Little wonder that as Trump runs for the White House again, quite a few Republicans are feeling very edgy.“It does not bode well for the Republican party if Trump should be indicted and win the nomination,” said former Pennsylvania Republican congressman Charlie Dent. “The electoral outcome would be disastrous for the GOP. How much losing can we take?” More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s own research showed that voter fraud did not cost him election – report

      by

      The Donald Trump election campaign’s efforts to show that thousands of ballots were cast in the name of dead people in the pivotal state of Georgia during the 2020 election resulted in a research report that in fact contradicted Trump’s claims that widespread election fraud cost him the presidency, according to a report on Friday.Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia in 2020 was key and the Trump team’s own information went against Trump’s subsequent denial of the legitimate win by his opponent, according to the Washington Post.Prosecutors investigating Trump’s role in the insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 by his supporters attempting to overturn the certification by Congress of Biden’s victory obtained the campaign research, the Washington Post reported.Trump’s insistence that thousands of ballots came from dead people became especially infamous following revelations that he had urged the Georgia secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, to “find” enough votes so he would win, during a 2 January 2021 call. The Trump-commissioned study refuting this very claim “was dated one day prior” to this call, per the Post.“Dead people”, Trump nevertheless remarked during the call. “So dead people voted, and I think the number is close to 5,000 people. And they went to obituaries. They went to all sorts of methods to come up with an accurate number, and a minimum is close to about 5,000 voters.”Raffensperger pushed back, saying: “The actual number were two. Two. Two people that were dead that voted. So that’s wrong.” Trump reportedly insisted: “In one state, we have a tremendous amount of dead people. So I don’t know – I’m sure we do in Georgia, too. I’m sure we do in Georgia, too.”Raffensperger’s comments were bolstered by an Atlanta Journal-Constitution report in December 2021 that Georgia authorities confirmed a mere four cases of ballots cast in the name of dead people, with every instance involving a ballot cast by the relative of a deceased person. Georgia prosecutors are investigating whether Trump and his allies broke the law in their efforts to reverse election results.Trump also made the unsubstantiated claim that “a tremendous number of dead people” cast ballots in Michigan. “I think it was … 18,000. Some unbelievably high number, much higher than yours, you were in the 4-5,000 category.”The Trump campaign-commissioned report said analysts had “high confidence” there were only nine deceased voters in Fulton county, Georgia. The researchers also said they believed the “potential statewide exposure” of dead voters was 23, the newspaper said.The research also contradicted Trump’s claims that some 1,500 ballots came from dead voters and that over 42,000 voted twice in Nevada. The analysis expressed “high confidence” that just 12 deceased-voter ballots were submitted in Clark county, Nevada; they said the number of possible double voters ranged from 45 to just over 9,000.While the report does not outright state that Biden won the election, the analysis also said they did not have evidence to substantiate fraud claims about five decisive states’ results. “This result was not unexpected,” the analysis reportedly said. “Our analysis of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Nevada concluded that in each state the final tabulated result was mathematically possible given absentee request rates.” More

    • 75 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Trump and DeSantis Could Both Lose

      by

      There are two different narratives running through the Republican Party right now. The first is the Trumpian populist narrative we’re all familiar with: American carnage … the elites have betrayed us … the left is destroying us … I am your retribution.On the other hand, Republican governors from places like Georgia, Virginia and New Hampshire often have a different story to tell. They are running growing, prospering states. (Seven of the 10 fastest growing states have Republican governors while eight of the 10 fastest shrinking states have Democratic governors.)So their stories are not about the left behind; they can tell stories about the places people are leaving for. Their most appealing narrative is: Jobs and people are coming to us, we’ve got the better model, we’re providing businesslike leadership to keep it going.These different narratives yield different political messages. The bellicose populists put culture war issues front and center. The conservative governors certainly play the values card, especially when schools try to usurp the role of parents, but they are strongest when emphasizing pocketbook issues and quality of life issues.Gov. Brian Kemp, for example, is making Georgia a hub for green manufacturing, attracting immense investments in electric vehicle technologies. In his inaugural address he vowed to make Georgia “the electric mobility capital of America.” As Alexander Burns noted in Politico, Kemp doesn’t sell this as climate change activism; it’s jobs and prosperity.The two narratives also produce radically different emotional vibes. The Donald Trump/Tucker Carlson orbit is rife with indignation and fury. Gov. Chris Sununu of New Hampshire, Virginia’s Glenn Youngkin and the previous Arizona governor, Doug Ducey, are warm, upbeat people who actually enjoy their fellow human beings.The former resemble the combative populism of Huey Long; the latter are more likely to reflect the optimism of F.D.R.If American politics worked as it should, then the Republican primaries would be contests between these two different narratives and governing styles — between populism and conservatism.But that’s not happening so far. The first reason is that Trump’s supporters are so many and so loyal, and his political style is so brutal, he may be deterring governors from entering the campaign. My educated guess is that Youngkin will not run for president in 2024; he wants to focus on Virginia. And Kemp may not, either. Kemp has taken on Trump in the past, but who wants to get into a gutter brawl with a front-runner when you already have a fantastic job governing the state you love? It could be that the G.O.P. presidential field will be much smaller than many of us thought a couple of months ago.The second reason we’re not seeing the two narratives face off is Ron DeSantis. The Florida governor should be the ultimate optimistic, businesslike conservative. His state is growing faster than any other in the country. But instead, he’s running as a dour, humorless culture war populist — presumably because that’s what he is.So right now the G.O.P. has two leading candidates with similar views, and the same ever-present anti-woke combativeness. The race is between populist Tweedledum and populist Tweedledee.The conventional wisdom is that it will stay that way — but maybe not. At this point in earlier election cycles, Jeb Bush, Rudy Giuliani, Scott Walker and Mike Huckabee were doing well in their polls. None became the nominee.Furthermore, the conservative managerial wing of the party is not some small offshoot of the Tucker Carlson universe. In 2022, the normies did much better than the populists. Look at Gov. Mike DeWine’s landslide win in Ohio. Millions and millions of Republicans are voting for these people.In Georgia Kemp took on Trump about the Big Lie and cruised to victory. As Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report has pointed out, Kemp had almost 90 percent approval among his state’s Republican voters in a January poll, whereas Trump’s favorability rating was nearly 20 points lower among those voters. Kemp’s overall approval rating among Georgia voters was a whopping 62 percent, including 34 percent of Democrats. Trump’s favorability rating was a pathetic 38 percent in this swing state.The Republican donor class is mobilizing to try to prevent a Trump nomination, and DeSantis is overpriced.Do we really think a guy with a small, insular circle of advisers and limited personal skills is going to do well in the intimate contests in Iowa and New Hampshire? As voters focus on the economy, DeSantis massively erred in playing culture war issues so hard.The conclusion I draw is that the Trump-DeSantis duopoly is unstable and represents a wing of the party many people are getting sick of.What does that mean? Maybe somebody like Kemp is coaxed into running. Maybe eyes turn to Tim Scott, an effective, optimistic senator from South Carolina. Maybe the former governor of New Jersey Chris Christie enters the race and takes a sledgehammer to Trump in a way that doesn’t help his own candidacy but shakes up the status quo.The elemental truth is that the Republican Party is like a baseball team that has tremendous talent in the minor leagues and a star pitcher who can’t throw strikes or do his job. Sooner or later, there’s going to be a change.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump would have believed aliens stole votes, key ally reportedly told jury

      by

      Such was Donald Trump’s troubled state of mind after the 2020 election that he would have believed aliens had stolen his ballots if anyone had told him so, a leading Republican senator said, according to a member of the special grand jury in the investigation of the former president’s attempt to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden in Georgia.According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, an unnamed juror described Senator Lindsey Graham, from South Carolina and a close Trump ally, as saying: “During that time, if somebody had told Trump that aliens came down and stole Trump ballots … Trump would’ve believed it.”Running for the Republican nomination again, Trump continues to push the lie that his conclusive defeat was the result of electoral fraud.The Atlanta paper interviewed five of the 23 members of the Fulton county grand jury, whose report was made partially public last month. The jury recommended indictments. Against whom is not known.In Georgia, Trump and his allies, including Graham, pressed state officials to investigate or overturn Biden’s narrow win.The Journal-Constitution said Emily Kohrs, the jury foreperson who spoke to the media last month, was not among jurors it spoke to.Lawyers for Trump have tried to use Kohrs’ comments to have the case dismissed.One juror said criticism of Kohrs led to the group being “portrayed as not serious. That really bothered me because that’s not how I felt. I took it very seriously.”Another said: “One of the most important things we’ll be a part of in our life was this eight-month process that we did … [it was] incredibly important to get it right.”Describing evidence not previously public, jurors described a call in which Trump tried to persuade the state House speaker, David Ralston, to convene a special session and overturn Biden’s win.Ralston, who died in November, “basically cut the president off”, the juror said.“He said, ‘I will do everything in my power that I think is appropriate’ … He just basically took the wind out of the sails. ‘Well, thank you,’ you know, is all the president could say.”The jurors heard from poll workers targeted by Trump and threatened by his supporters.“I was pretty emotional throughout the whole thing,” one juror said. “I wouldn’t cry in front of any of the witnesses, but when I would get in my car, I was like, I just left that and I have to just go do my job now? … I just know things that are hard to know.”Witnesses who invoked their fifth-amendment right against self-incrimination – reported to have included the former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani – proved frustrating.“When people would take the fifth over and over, we could kind of go, ‘Ugh,’” a juror said. “Not because we’re like, ‘Oh my gosh you’re guilty, whatever.’ It was like, ‘We’re going to be here all day.’”One juror said prosecutors used video of speeches, interviews or other testimony if a witness did not answer.Trump did not appear. One juror said: “With the benefit of hindsight, we should have sent a voluntary invitation.”The juror said his mind had been changed by moves to indict Trump in New York, over a hush money payment to a porn star.The Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, is now deciding whether to convene another grand jury to issue indictments. The full report remains under wraps.One juror said: “A lot’s gonna come out sooner or later. And it’s gonna be massive. It’s gonna be massive.” More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Little-Known Lawyer, a Trump Ally, Draws Scrutiny in Georgia

      by

      A special grand jury looking into election meddling interviewed Robert Cheeley, a sign that false claims made by Donald J. Trump’s allies loom large in the case.ATLANTA — At a Georgia State Senate hearing a few weeks after President Donald J. Trump lost his bid for re-election, Rudolph W. Giuliani began making outlandish claims. “There are 10 ways to demonstrate that this election was stolen, that the votes were phony, that there were a lot of them — dead people, felons, phony ballots,” he told the assembled legislators.After Mr. Giuliani’s testimony, a like-minded Georgia lawyer named Robert Cheeley presented video clips of election workers handling ballots at the State Farm Arena in downtown Atlanta. Mr. Cheeley spent 15 minutes laying out specious assertions that the workers were double- and triple-counting votes, saying their actions “should shock the conscience of every red blooded Georgian” and likening what he said had happened to the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor.His comments mostly flew under the radar at the time, overshadowed by the election fraud claims made by Mr. Giuliani, who was then Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, and by other higher-profile figures. But Mr. Cheeley’s testimony did not end up in the dustbin. He was among the witnesses questioned last year by a special grand jury in Atlanta that investigated election interference by Mr. Trump and his allies, the grand jury’s forewoman, Emily Kohrs, said in an interview last month.Robert Cheeley reads through Georgia law during a hearing at the Henry County Courthouse in McDonough, Ga., in 2021.Alyssa Pointer/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, via Associated PressThe fact that Mr. Cheeley was called to appear before the special grand jury adds to the evidence that although the Atlanta investigation has focused on Mr. Trump’s biggest areas of legal exposure — the calls he made to pressure local officials and his involvement in a scheme to draft bogus presidential electors — the false claims made by his allies at legislative hearings have also been of significant interest. Mr. Giuliani has been told that he is among the targets who could face charges in the investigation.“He did testify before us,” Ms. Kohrs said of Mr. Cheeley in the interview.His appearance left such an impression that Ms. Kohrs began reciting from memory the beginning of Mr. Cheeley’s remarks at the State Senate hearing. Asked if his testimony to the special grand jury had been credible, she said, “I’m going to tell you that Mr. Cheeley was not one that I’m going to forget.”Mr. Cheeley did not return calls for comment for this article, and he was not present when a reporter visited his office on Wednesday in the Atlanta suburb of Alpharetta. The fact that he testified before the special grand jury was not previously known.Understand Georgia’s Investigation of Election InterferenceCard 1 of 5A legal threat to Trump. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia Republicans race to pass laws to restrict and challenge votes

      by

      Georgia Republicans race to pass laws to restrict and challenge votesIn the final days of the legislative session, there’s also a push to create a mechanism to unseat county election board membersIn the final few days of this year’s Georgia assembly legislative session, Republican lawmakers raced to propose laws seeking to restrict voting access, and make it easier for citizens to challenge and subvert normal election processes.‘We will prosecute death threats’: Arizona’s new attorney general fights to protect election workersRead moreSenate bill 221, house bill 422 and house bill 426 are just a few of the newly proposed election laws, which come after state Republicans, including the secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, praised election officials for smooth elections in the past two years. They include measures to eradicate absentee ballot drop boxes, allow citizens to more easily challenge voter registrations – which Republican conspiracy theorists had already done with little backing evidence during the midterms – and even unseal ballots for review.While some of the elements of these proposed laws offer expanded flexibility and resources for elections, including the popular bipartisan effort to eradicate runoff elections in the state, other aspects are grounded in unfounded claims and conspiracy theories surrounding mass election fraud stemming from the 2020 election.Cynthia Battles, policy and engagement director of the Georgia Coalition for the People’s Agenda, a civil rights advocacy organization, recently raised her concerns at a hearing for house bill 426. “We continue relitigating the 2020 election, and the Georgia assembly is making legislation to try and appease some conspiracy theories,” she said.SB221: ‘weaponizing voter challenges’SB221, the most controversial law, allows voter eligibility challenges to proceed without adequate due diligence. Last year, the number of challenges statewide was nearly 100,000, yielding many unfounded claims from apparent election deniers, and clogging up the process for overwhelmed election officials during a critical time. Under SB221, voters could be purged from rolls simply based on allegations that include “a sworn statement by any person with relevant information”.“We have seen a lot of organized and weaponized groups that have been weaponizing voter challenges for partisan gain,” said Isabel Otero, Georgia policy director at the Southern Poverty Law Center. “That causes a lot of concern for us.”In addition, the bill proposes using the National Change of Address (NCOA) database to determine a voter’s eligibility to vote in elections. However, according to Otero, this could directly violate federal law.“That program is not very reliable as a tool for establishing the eligibility of a voter,” said Otero. “And there are federal laws that provide for safe harbor provisions when removing voters from the rolls using the NCOA data because the NCOA data is known to be inaccurate.”The proposed changes under SB221 don’t end at voter eligibility. In a last-minute change during a senate committee on ethics meeting, Republican senators amended the proposed legislation to include language that completely eliminates the use of drop boxes throughout the state. This comes after previous legislation slashed the number of drop boxes available by more than half after the 2020 election when record numbers of voters returned their absentee ballots via drop boxes. There is no evidence that drop boxes increase voter fraud.HB422: an assault on members of the election boardMeanwhile, house bill 422, which is specific to Ware county, would allow the political party that receives the most votes in the preceding election – in this case, the Republican party – to unseat current election board members and appoint replacements of their choosing. If this law is passed, it will unseat the county’s three Black board of elections members. This is in direct contrast to other counties in the state that hold spaces for members of both parties.Shawn Taylor, the current co-chair of the Ware county board of elections, is concerned that without safeguards in place, those nominated to the board will not properly represent the population of the county.“The board currently has three Black members,” said Taylor. “We believe that this legislation is an assault on not only the members of the board but on the Black and brown members of the community.”Fallon McClure, deputy director of the ACLU of Georgia, said HB422 is part of an alarming and growing pattern of legislation that allows biased political motivations to rule in local election boards.“We must take partisanship out of elections administration and make it a fair process where everyone can have their voice heard,” said McClure.Some south Georgia residents are concerned that even though this law currently only affects Ware county and does say that Democrats can submit nominations for the election boards, stark partisan divides make this just a formality that will give way to Democrats losing their voice.“We are very concerned that the fair process will fail,” said former state house candidate Lethia Kittrell. “Our major concern is that this is already feeding down into other areas.”HB426: removing a ‘check against partisanship’Though the proposed law’s connection to election conspiracy theories is not as direct, another proposed bill has a much clearer connection. HB426 aims to remove the court seal on paper ballot verifications. As it stands, a lawsuit must be filed to access physical copies of election documentation. However, under HB426, only a request would need to be made for public access of ballots.While the bill’s sponsor, Representative Shaw Blackmon, says it will improve transparency and help guarantee a truly “citizen-run election”, those opposed to the bill maintain that this is another tool that can disenfranchise voters and burden election officials.“The court seal provides a check against partisanship,” said Phil Olaleye, a Democratic state representative. “I would not want to lower the barrier for potentially inundating our local officials and staff with an endless stream of requests coming from folks who are upset at the politics of the day.”Anne Gray Herring of Common Cause Georgia echoed Olaleye’s sentiments. “Consider the real risks of an unmanageable quantity of review requests, including those that are made in bad faith and the limits of time and resources for county officials,” she said.Controversial election legislation is nothing new for Georgia. Like the contentious SB202 in 2021 – which overhauled the state’s voting system – these newly proposed laws will significantly affect election officials and voters.“Right now in our election system, we see an enormous amount of burnout and an enormous amount of turnover,” said Vasu Abhiraman of the ACLU of Georgia. “This should be an emergency to try to make the lives of local election officials easier.”Voting advocates like Abhiraman agree that this type of sweeping legislation each session is a direct result of election lies and conspiracy theories.“[This is] nothing more than continued political appeasement of the folks who have ripped so many lives apart and who have suppressed the vote in Georgia,” said Abhiraman.“Underlying it is the perpetuation of a false narrative and an attempt to disenfranchise a subset of voters.”TopicsUS newsThe fight for democracyGeorgiaUS voting rightsRepublicansUS politicsnewsReuse this content More