The real reason Lindsey Graham and others haven’t been indicted in Fulton County (yet)

Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

When Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis announced criminal indictments against nineteen people including Donald Trump, there were some surprise names left off the list. For instance, why weren’t the likes of Lindsey Graham, Michael Flynn, and Lin Wood indicted?

Now, thanks to a newly released internal report, we know that the special grand jury did recommend Graham, Flynn, and Wood for indictment. But when Fani Willis later put the case in front of a regular grand jury for the purpose of bringing indictments, she didn’t have the regular grand jury bring those indictments.

There are three plausible explanations for this – and it’s important to keep in mind that there may be different explanations for why each person wasn’t indicted.

The first reason, which could apply to Lindsey Graham along with former Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, is that the speech and debate clause would make it difficult to get a conviction against them at trial. To that end, only a small majority of special grand jurors voted to recommend indicting Graham. This means that if Graham were indicted, he might have ended up with a deadlocked trial jury no matter how many times he was put on trial.

The second reason for Fani Willis not to bring indictments against certain people would be that she simply hasn’t brought them yet. Willis could feel that the actions of people like Flynn and Wood were far enough removed from the overall RICO plot that she’s decided to try them separately. And since she only had a certain amount of grand jury time available to her when she brought the Trump indictments (remember, she went late into the night just to get it done), it’s possible that she’s waiting until her next grand jury window to bring these other indictments.

The third reason would be that these people chose cooperation over indictment. We’ve already seen Fani Willis give immunity to eight of the fake electors in exchange for their testimony against bigger fish. It’s entirely possible that some of these other people either cut formal cooperation deals, or were simply so helpful on the stand that Willis decided not to indict them in the end.

Some of these explanations would seem to fit some of these people better than others. Lindsey Graham is the kind of survivor who would seemingly throw others under the bus to save himself in a heartbeat if he felt it necessary. Flynn has already reneged on a cooperation deal with the Feds, so it’s difficult to imagine Willis giving him such a deal even if he sought one – and it doesn’t feel like he’d seek one. Wood is erratic enough that no one would be surprised by any choice he made.

We may eventually get answers. If any of these people have cut cooperation deals, we’ll see them testifying against Trump and others when these cases get to trial. If any of these people are getting indicted later, we’ll see that as well. And if we never do hear anything about these individuals, then in the end we can presume that Willis simply didn’t think that getting a conviction against them was realistic.

In any case, keep in mind that Fani Willis is a local District Attorney who brought racketeering indictments against a former President of the United States and eighteen other politically connected people. No one can accuse her of having pulled her punches. If she has indeed decided not to indict certain people, then she must have had a solid legal basis for it.

Palmer Report pointed out a long time ago that while Donald Trump and most of the villains around him would end up indicted and in prison, not every villainous figure would get indicted. Decisions about indictments are made – and should be made – based on whether the available evidence is going to be enough to convince a trial jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether Fani Willis’ indictments stop at nineteen people or keep going the next time she has grand jury time, there’s no doubt that she’s basing it all on legally solid decision making. This is all a big win for us, so let’s treat it like one.

Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.