World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia takes on Trump and his allies | podcast

      by

      Until five months ago, no former US president had ever faced criminal charges. As of Monday evening, Donald Trump is facing 91 felony counts. The 97-page indictment handed down by a Fulton county grand jury in Georgia includes 41 criminal counts, 13 of them against Trump. This case may represent the biggest legal peril for Trump to date and it could see him behind bars, no matter who wins the presidential election next year.
      Joan E Greve and Sam Levine discuss every possible outcome

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

    • 175 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s indictment can’t solve the real threat: our undemocratic electoral system | Lawrence Douglas

      by

      Read the indictment handed down by a Fulton county, Georgia, grand jury: weighing in at 98 pages, it is a breathtaking document, granular in its description of a coordinated criminal enterprise that brazenly broke numerous Georgia state laws.The 19 persons named in the racketeering charges are not, however, members of some sleazy organized crime syndicate; rather, they include the former president of the United States, his chief of staff, a former mayor of New York, a former law school dean and a former official in the US Department of Justice. Together they stand accused of knowingly and willfully joining a conspiracy to subvert the outcome of a fair, democratic election.Placed alongside Trump’s other three indictments, the Georgia case bears the greatest similarity to the federal charges, filed earlier this month, accusing Trump of criminal acts that culminated in the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. Still, the Georgia matter carries different risks and rewards.Georgia’s racketeering statute is a more flexible instrument than its federal counterpart, and so empowers the prosecution to craft a broad narrative linking Trump’s lying to the state’s officials, his intimidating and defaming its election officers, and his sanctioning a slate of false Georgian electors for his nationwide efforts to overturn Biden’s victory. And as the constitution’s pardon power only extends to federal matters, a state conviction would deny Trump the opportunity to pardon himself (itself an act of dubious constitutionality).In declaring that she intends to try all 19 co-conspirators in a single trial, however, Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis risks turning the proceeding into a long and unfocused affair, marred by the grandstanding of multiple lawyers for the defense. Add to this the fact that while federal trials cannot be televised, this case arguably could be, raising the concern that a solemn proceeding could turn into a media circus.There is, of course, another deeper source of alarm. Much as we might hope that the criminal justice system will put an end to the clear and present danger that Trump poses to our constitutional democracy, the prospect remains that the ultimate judgment on Trump will be passed by the voters in November 2024. And this reminds us why Trump trained his lies on the result in Georgia in 2020.Biden defeated Trump by nearly 8m votes in 2020, a substantial if not overwhelming margin of victory. Matters were very different in the electoral college. A combined total of 44,000 votes handed Biden victory in the swing states of Arizona, Wisconsin and Georgia.Had Trump succeeded in “finding” 45,000 more votes in these three states, the 2020 election would have resulted in an electoral college tie, an unseemly result that, by the terms of the constitution, hands the task of electing the president to the House of Representatives. In a travesty of democratic rule, when the House elects the president, each state delegation, and not each representative, gets a single vote, and while Democrats still controlled the House after the 2020 election, Republicans actually enjoyed a majority of state delegations. Trump would have won.While it is hard to imagine Trump defeating Biden in the popular vote in 2024, the electoral college remains another matter. Polls already predict another tight electoral race. Maga zealots and election deniers continue to target and attack independent election officials in the key swing states. Add to the mix the possibility of a third-party candidate, who, like Ralph Nader in 2000, would have no prospect of winning but could peel away votes in these crucial states, and the perils magnify.Generations of Americans have recognized the defects in the way we elect our president. The first serious effort to eliminate the system came in 1816 and hundreds have followed, all failing given the extreme difficulty of amending our constitution. It is a grotesque fact that a candidate who has made clear his hostility to democratic governance could only be returned to office through an antiquated, dysfunctional and anti-democratic electoral system.
      Lawrence Douglas is the author, most recently, of Will He Go? Trump and the Looming Election Meltdown in 2020. He is a contributing opinion writer for the Guardian US and teaches at Amherst College More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US senator warns top Saudi over refusal to testify on PGA golf deal

      by

      A senior US lawmaker has challenged a Saudi Arabian official’s refusal to voluntarily testify before a Senate committee investigating the kingdom’s controversial golf deal with the PGA Tour, saying officials should be prepared to be subject to American laws and oversight if they invest in the US.Richard Blumenthal, a Democratic senator from Connecticut who serves as chairman of the Senate’s permanent subcommittee on investigations, also said he would consider “other legal methods” to force Yasir al-Rumayyan, the governor of the Public Investment Fund (PIF), to testify if he continued to refuse.Al-Rumayyan, who also serves as the chairman of Saudi Aramco and the Premier League club Newcastle United, was given until 18 August to comply with the committee’s documents request.Any move to testify before the Senate could have significant implications for al-Rumayyan, including being subjected to questions about the controversial so-called “anti-corruption” drive headed by the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman. That effort saw assets transferred to the PIF, and the alleged use by the kingdom of PIF-owned jets to transport Saudi agents who killed the journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.There is no suggestion that al-Rumayyan had any knowledge or personal involvement in the matter.While the increasingly fractious exchanges between the Senate committee and the PIF appear to be centered on the Saudi-backed merger between the PGA Tour and the LIV Tour, Blumenthal’s comments strike at larger concerns in Washington over Saudi Arabia’s investment ambitions.Blumenthal said the PIF, which is worth about $780bn, already has “extensive business dealings” in the US and was much more than a “passive investor”. The sovereign wealth fund holds a $3.5bn stake in Uber, has recently established a US subsidiary, and holds investments in prominent US venture capital firms.“In short, PIF cannot have it both ways: if it wants to engage with the United States commercially, it must be subject to United States law and oversight,” Blumenthal said.The Senate committee investigating the PGA deal sent its first request to al-Rumayyan on 21 June, inviting him to testify at a 11 July hearing. The PIF declined, citing scheduling conflicts.In a letter released on Wednesday, Blumenthal said the committee’s second request – for al-Rumayyan to testify at an acceptable date in September – was met with a letter from PIF’s legal counsel, saying that al-Rumayyan would be “an inappropriate witness” because he was a minister “bound by the kingdom’s laws regarding the confidentiality of certain information”.The senator rejected the claim, pointing to a US district court decision in California, which ruled that al-Rumayyan was not exempt from testifying in legal matters connected to the PIF’s commercial activities. The court added that Saudi Arabia’s “sovereign considerations” were diminished by the PIF’s intent to benefit from its investments in the US.The PIF’s position – that al-Rumayyan deserves sovereign immunity because of his position as a Saudi official, and his obligations to the Saudi state – appears to directly contradict the kingdom’s public stance on other deals.In the UK, the PIF’s takeover of a controlling stake in Newcastle in October 2021 was given the green light after the club was given “legally binding assurances” that the kingdom would not have any control over the club.The PIF has declined in the past to address the apparent contradiction. The fund did not immediately comment on the Blumenthal letter. More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump prosecutor Fani Willis faces racist abuse after indicting ex-US president

      by

      Fani Willis, the Fulton county district attorney in Georgia who is prosecuting Donald Trump and 18 other allies over efforts to overturn the 2020 election, is facing a flurry of racist online abuse after the former president attacked his opponents using the word “riggers”, a thinly veiled play on the N-word.Hours after Willis had released the indictments on Monday night, Trump went on his social media platform Truth Social calling for all charges to be dropped and predicting he would exonerated. He did not mention Willis by name, but accused prosecutors of pursuing the wrong criminal targets.“They never went after those that Rigged the Election,” Trump wrote. “They only went after those that fought to find the RIGGERS!”Willis is African American. So too are the two New York-based prosecutors who have investigated Trump, the Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg who indicted him in April over alleged hush-money payments, and Letitia James, the state attorney general who is investigating Trump’s financial records.Trump’s allusion to the racial slur was immediately picked up by his supporters on far-right platforms including Gab and Patriots.win. The sites hosted hundreds of posts featuring “riggers” in their headlines in a disparaging context.The word has also been attached to numerous social media posts to Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss. The two Black poll workers from Atlanta were falsely accused by some of the 19 defendants in the Fulton county case of committing election fraud during the 2020 vote count, and the indictment accuses Trump allies of harassing them.Calls to violence have proliferated across far-right sites since the charges were made public on Monday night. Several Gab posts reproduced images of nooses and gallows and called for Willis and grand jurors who delivered the charges to be hanged. And posts on Patriots.win combined the wordplay with direct calls to violence.Earlier this month, Willis wrote to Fulton county commissioners and judges to warn them to stay vigilant in the face of rising tensions ahead of the release of the indictment. She told them that she and her staff had been receiving racist threats and voicemails since she began her investigation into Trump’s attempt to subvert the election two years ago.“I guess I am sending this as a reminder that you should stay alert over the month of August and stay safe,” she said.As Willis’s investigation approached its climax, Trump intensified his personal attacks on her through social media. He has accused her of prosecutorial misconduct and even of being racist herself.Willis has rebuffed his claims as “derogatory and false”.Trump has also unleashed a barrage of vitriol against Jack Smith, the special counsel who earlier this month brought four federal charges against Trump over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Trump has referred to the prosecutor, who is white, as “Deranged Jack Smith”.The judge in the federal case, Tanya Chutkan, has warned him to be careful not to make inflammatory public comments about the proceedings, saying she would “take whatever measures are necessary” to prevent intimidation of witnesses or contamination of the jury pool. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia indictment lays out Trump election plot in all its shocking detail

      by

      There’s no other way to say it: the 98-page indictment handed down by a Fulton county grand jury on Monday represents the most aggressive effort to hold Donald Trump and allies accountable for their efforts to overturn the 2020 election.The document is staggering in its breadth and the ambition of its charges. The 41 counts of crimes in it, including 13 against Trump, detail the lies the former president and his co-defendants told the public about fraud to try and keep him in power. It doesn’t back away from charging Trump’s attorneys and inner circle with crimes for coordinating a plan to create slates of fake electors and to stop Congress from counting votes. Some of the state’s 16 fake electors themselves also face charges. And it also casts a wide net, not letting those who breached voting equipment and intimidated poll workers off the hook.Instead, the indictment tells perhaps the most comprehensive story to date of one of the most brazen efforts to date to subvert American democracy.Legally, the Georgia case may represent the biggest legal peril for Trump to date. If he wins the presidential election next year, Trump cannot pardon himself, something he could theoretically do if he is convicted on similar charges pending in federal court. In Georgia, a defendant must serve five years in prison before a pardon is even considered by the state board of pardon and paroles. Unlike many other states, the governor of Georgia does not have the ability to unilaterally pardon people.The focus of the indictment – Trump’s efforts to stay in power – is the same as the federal charges Jack Smith, the justice department special counsel, filed earlier this month. But the two cases are significantly different. Smith’s case focuses squarely on Trump and his specific efforts to overturn the election, leaving other co-conspirators unnamed and uncharged (for now). The Fulton county case, brought by Fani Willis, the district attorney, uses precise detail to place Trump at the center of a large criminal enterprise that includes nearly 50 people (19 of them are named, 30 are not).Of course, there is more of a risk to bringing a sprawling criminal indictment. The case is likely to be tied up in extensive procedural battles before even moving forward to a trial. Willis said Monday she intends to try all 19 defendants together, setting up a potential blockbuster, but complicated trial. Willis has not shied away from such challenges in the past, relying on the same Georgia racketeering statute at the heart of the Trump case to successfully get convictions against Atlanta teachers and is currently using them in a Rico case against the rapper Young Thug and the YSL gang.“Jack Smith seems to be on a mission to get this done and to focus on Donald Trump,” said Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University. The Georgia case, he said, was “very different”.“All of these actors are being held to account,” he said. “What might lack in efficiency and expediency in Georgia is made up for in the fact that I think Fani Willis is really trying to tell a narrative here about what these individuals did in her view to undermine and destroy American democracy.”That story, according to the indictment, began the morning after election day in 2020. Speaking at the White House, Trump lied about the election results. As votes were still being counted, Trump claimed there was “a fraud” on the American public and said “frankly, we did win this election”, he said. The speech is “Act 1” in the indictment – the start of the conspiracy to keep Trump in power.The indictment goes on to do something extraordinary – it translates lies that Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell told about the election into criminal acts. When Giuliani and Powell falsely claimed fraud at a press conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters, they were furthering a criminal conspiracy. When Giuliani appeared at a Georgia legislative hearing and lied about fraudulent ballots being cast, he made false statements, a crime in Georgia, the indictment says.In one of its most significant sections, the indictment also brings criminal charges against two people who sought to intimidate and harass Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, two Fulton county election workers who were at the center of false claims of fraud amplified by Giuliani. Both women faced vicious harassment after the 2020 election that upended their lives. The indictment details how Trevian Kutti, a former publicist for Kanye West and R Kelly, worked with two other men, Harrison Floyd and Stephen Lee, to try and pressure Freeman into confessing to voter fraud. Kutti showed up at Freeman’s doorstep, eventually met with her, and told her to confess to voter fraud or else people would come for her within 48 hours and she would go to jail.Willis’s decision to translate the episode into criminal charges is significant. It underscores the breadth with which Willis is framing the conspiracy – no episode is too tangential, or harebrained, to escape her scrutiny. It also amounts to the first time that anyone has faced criminal charges related to the harassment of Freeman and Moss, two Black women who have come to symbolize the human toll of Trump’s lies about the election.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWillis also doesn’t shy away from charging the cadre of lawyers who sought to provide legal cover for Trump with fringe ideas. Ken Chesebro, a little-known lawyer who authored a key memorandum laying out a strategy for fake electors, was charged with multiple crimes, including conspiracy to commit forgery, conspiracy to impersonate a public officer, and conspiracy to commit false statements and writings. Jeffrey Clark, a justice department official who tried to pressure superiors to send a letter claiming fraud in Georgia, was charged with multiple crimes. As does John Eastman, the lawyer who tried to provide a legal pretext for Congress to overturn the election.For the first time, a high-level White House aide, Mark Meadows, also faces criminal charges. The indictment cites multiple meetings Meadows had with state lawmakers across the country to get them to try and overturn the election results. It also cites a December meeting Meadows and Trump held with John McEntee, another White House aide, in which he and Trump requested McEntee prepare a memo outlining how to delay the counting and certification of electoral college votes. The document outlines Meadows presence on the telephone call in which Trump infamously pressured Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes” to overturn the election. In doing so, Trump and Meadows committed a felony by soliciting Raffensperger to violate his oath as a public officer.Lastly, Willis makes it clear the story of Trump’s subversion includes efforts by his allies to breach voting equipment. Similar to charges filed in Michigan earlier this month, this marks a significant attempt to hold Trump accountable for efforts to sow doubt about the actual machinery of elections. As Trump claimed fraud, an election official in Coffee county helped his allies gain unauthorized access to voting equipment. The information extracted was passed on to other election deniers who were trying to prove the outlandish idea that the equipment was rigged.While Willis’s indictment is complex and contains 161 overt acts, she boils down the heart of it before even listing the charges.“Defendant Donald John Trump lost the United States presidential election held on 3 November 2020. One of the states he lost was Georgia. Trump and the other defendants charged in this indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump,” she says.While she goes on to list all of the complex crimes Trump and allies committed, many of the paragraphs in the indictment end the same way, reminding the public that each action was “an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy”. More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Trump’s latest charges: the case for the cases against an ex-president | Editorial

      by

      Even close followers of the news could be forgiven for losing track of the criminal proceedings against Donald Trump. His indictment in Georgia is his second in a fortnight, and his fourth in total. The 13 new counts added to the scorecard bring the total – so far – to 91. What was once the precedent-shattering prospect of a former president facing trial on serious charges now seems oddly commonplace. That’s without mentioning the two impeachments he survived in office, or the multiple civil cases against him.Like the federal charges brought by the special counsel Jack Smith earlier this month, these are vastly graver matters than those relating to the payment of hush money to a pornography star, or even to the retention of classified national security documents. The federal case also addresses his attempts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia. But Mr Trump would have less ability to interfere with a state-level case if re-elected, and would not be able to pardon himself. The use of Georgia’s racketeering legislation, broader than the federal equivalent, is also striking, and not only because it is usually associated with the pursuit of mobsters. It does not require prosecutors to prove that defendants directly broke the law, but that they knowingly coordinated with others who did so. The charging of 18 alleged co-conspirators may increase the likelihood of former associates flipping and assisting the prosecution.Nonetheless, the pattern is well established. Prosecutors present detailed evidence against Mr Trump, enlarging on what was already in the public domain. He dismisses the charges as a “witch-hunt”. Republicans who briefly shunned him after the storming of the Capitol now rally to his cause once more. The danger of overestimating the difference that these cases could make on next year’s election is similarly well rehearsed. Most voters made up their minds on Mr Trump long ago. He claims each charge as further evidence of the grand conspiracy he falsely claims denied him victory in 2020 and, therefore, as mandating more support, including financial. The former president himself told voters recently that “we need one more indictment to close out the election”. Previous charges appeared to boost his lead over his Republican rival Ron DeSantis, who is trailing far behind him.His favourability ratings fell among Republicans following his June indictment over illegally holding classified documents, and last year’s midterms were a reminder of the differences between primary and general election voters. In purely practical terms, the need to fight – and even testify in – criminal cases will be a time-consuming distraction while trying to campaign for the presidency.Still, the next election is more likely to be swayed by Joe Biden’s ability to convince voters that the economy is thriving – something they are unwilling to believe as yet – and by campaigning on issues such as abortion. This month, citizens in Ohio overwhelmingly rejected the constitutional amendment that Republicans were trying to rush through to fend off abortion rights protections, demonstrating the continued commitment of voters to safeguarding access – and their growing awareness of Republican efforts to tilt elections. Many grow more determined as they see more such efforts.In contrast, the impact of each set of criminal charges, even if they are more serious than the last, is inevitably reduced somewhat as they accumulate. Democracy is not only about contests of popularity: it cannot survive without procedures of accountability.
      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      With Donald Trump the Republican talisman again, should America’s allies plan for the worst? | Bruce Wolpe

      by

      The question from the Finnish journalist to President Biden at last month’s US-Nordic leaders’ summit in Helsinki was direct: “What actions will you take to assure Finland that the US will remain a reliable Nato partner for decades to come?”Biden replied: “I absolutely guarantee it. There is no question. There’s overwhelming support from the American people,” before adding the caveat: “You know, no one can guarantee the future, but this is the best bet anyone could make … As sure as anything can possibly be said about American foreign policy, we will stay connected to Nato – connected to Nato, beginning, middle and end.”In an interview a few weeks earlier, Richard Haass, who recently stepped down as president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the most serious threat to the security of the world right now was the United States. “It’s us,” he told Peter Baker of the New York Times. “I should have a nickel for every non-American, every foreign leader who said to me, ‘I don’t know what’s the norm and what’s the exception any more. Is the Biden administration a return to the America I took for granted and Trump will be a historical blip? Or is Biden the exception and Trump and Trumpism are the new America?’”These issues are beginning to hit home in Australia and with other US allies. Many are already seeing in 2024 a reprise of the successive shocks of 2016 – the Brexit vote in June as a precursor to the upheaval heralded by Trump’s election in November – and what ensued during Trump’s four years in office. We know from the litany of explosive books, from veteran journalist Bob Woodward to Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton and so many others in between, what Trump is capable of – and that he would approach a second term with vengeance uppermost in his mind against those who crossed him or stood in his way. Today, leaders of the world’s democracies at least have the benefit of over-the-horizon political radar of what may be coming, given the long lead time of Trump’s all-so-visible and unrelenting campaign to regain power.With respect to my country, Australia, the deep engagement with the US began on the western front in the first world war. Australia has supported American troops in numerous wars the US has waged since then. The Anzus treaty is in its 71st year and “a hundred years of mateship” has been richly celebrated. It is safe to say that Australia’s alliance with the US is the least troubled of any bilateral relationship the US has with other countries, including Israel, Canada and the UK. Australia is an integral part of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the Quad) with India, Japan and the US. The Aukus agreement brings the US together with the UK and Australia in a strategic partnership to promote stability and security in the Asia Pacific region.But what happens to this web of ties if Trump returns to the presidency? Trumpism has four pillars that he wields as swords. America first, to ensure that US interests are always paramount in any foreign policy and military decision taken. Isolationism, where the default position is to end American commitments overseas and to bring US forces home. Protectionism, expressed through trade and tariff wars with the goal of securing trade surpluses for the US with all its trading partners, from China to Canada to Mexico to Europe and back across all of Asia. And nativism, to build walls on America’s southern border and close its doors to migrants seeking the American dream.In a second term, he will pursue these policies even harder. Trump learned immense lessons from his first four years about who, in the US and around the world, frustrated his policy objectives and how they could be crushed and punished to help him win more victories in his second term. What happens if Trump cripples, perhaps even works deliberately to destroy, Nato and the UN, begins a trade war with the EU, executes accommodations with Putin and Russia over Ukraine, surrenders Taiwan to China and withdraws troops and naval forces from the Asia Pacific region?At this granular level, each leader of a state around the globe allied with the US faces the daunting issue of how to manage all this incoming from Trump should he return to the Oval Office. How can you best deal with a hostile partner? How do those western countries allied with the US today realign their policies to ensure their security tomorrow?But these questions also reveal a deeper issue with respect to the ties that bind so many democracies around the world with the US. For example, can Australia – should Australia – continue its alliance with the US if the US in 2025 may no longer be the United States that has existed for nearly 250 years?Australia’s alliance is with a country that stands for freedom; democracy; liberty; human and civil rights; and the rule of law. What happens if the struggle for democracy and the soul of America fails in 2025? What if President Trump declares martial law, if the military is deployed to cities across the country to put down protests and restore law and order? What if Trump disobeys court orders, including from the supreme court, to cease and desist his executive actions? What if he ignores laws passed by Congress, orders the detention and imprisonment of his political enemies, has journalists arrested and jailed, and shuts down certain media outlets? What if he interferes with elections held in states across the country and for Congress?If Trump dismantles American democracy, America will no longer be populated by united states. It will be bitterly divided. There will be immense unrest. The country will no longer be the United States.Trump redux therefore poses an existential question: how could Australia remain allied with a country that has discarded the fundamental values of democracy that have bound these two nations together? How can Australia be allied with a country that is drifting towards autocracy?And it’s not just Australia. Every country strategically tied to the US will need to contemplate the consequences of Trump’s campaign for the presidency.It is time to face up to this question. It is better for America’s allies to be proactive in 2024 in planning for such a catastrophic upheaval in global politics than to be reactive in 2025.As long as Trump is within reach of the presidency, this question is a clear and present danger to every democratic country that today stands proudly with the US.
      Bruce Wolpe is a senior fellow at the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney. He is author of Trump’s Australia (Allen & Unwin, 2023) More

    • 150 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia grand jury indictment: what we know so far in Trump case

      by

      A grand jury in Georgia has issued an indictment accusing the Donald Trump of efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.
      Prosecutors brought 11 counts against Trump and his associates, including forgery and racketeering, which is used to target members of organized crime groups.
      Prosecutors charged 18 other people, including Mark Meadows, Trump’s former White House chief of staff, and lawyers Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman.
      The Trump campaign has responded to the indictment, saying, “President Trump will continue to power through this unprecedented abuse of power”.
      A news conference featuring district attorney Fani T Willis is expected to take place after the indictment is released.
      The court briefly posted a document on its website earlier on Monday listing several felony charges against Trump, but quickly removed it without explanation. Willis’s office said at the time no charges had been filed and declined further comment.
      Over the course of a two-year investigation, Willis has examined Trump’s alleged efforts to pressure state leaders to reverse his 11,000-vote loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the state and organise a slate of illegitimate electors to undermine the process of formalising Biden’s victory. She has also looked into an alleged attempt by Trump’s allies to manipulate voting equipment in rural Coffee county.
      Trump has denied any wrongdoing and accuses Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis, an elected Democrat, of being politically motivated.
      Trump, 77, has been criminally indicted three times so far this year, including once by US special counsel Jack Smith on charges of trying to overturn his election defeat. He has long dismissed the many investigations, including two impeachments, he has faced in his years in politics as a politically motivated “witch-hunt”. More