Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is not worried about his testimony to a special grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, after the jury suggested last week that at least one witness in the state’s 2020 election investigation may have committed perjury.
Speaking Sunday, Feb. 19, on ABC News’ “This Week,” Graham said he had “no concerns” on the matter but noted that he did agree with the jury’s analysis that no widespread fraud had taken place during Georgia’s 2020 presidential election that could overturn the results.
“I think the voting by mail had problems,” he added, “but I found no evidence of widespread fraud.”
The jury, convened by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, was tasked with investigating whether former President Donald Trump and his allies tried to disrupt the lawful administration of Georgia’s 2020 presidential election.
Willis initiated the probe in early 2021 based on a leaked phone call in which then-President Trump suggested Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger could “find” votes to overturn the state’s election results.
After attempting and ultimately failing to quash a subpoena for his testimony, Graham testified before the jury on Nov. 22 last year.
“I had to decide, as a senator, whether or not to validate the Georgia election,” Graham said Sunday. “I thought it made sense to call up the Georgia secretary of state, and I did. I asked hard questions, but at the end of the day, I voted to certify the election results in Georgia for their 2020 election.”
Parts of the jury’s final report (pdf) were released to the public on Feb. 16, including the portion that noted a majority of the jury believed that perjury “may have been committed” by “one or more witnesses” in the investigation.
However, on the orders of Judge Robert McBurney, the identities of those witnesses are being kept secret “for now.”
“Potential future defendants were not able to present evidence outside the scope of what the District Attorney asked them,” the judge noted in the Feb. 13 order. “They could not call their own witnesses who might rebut what other State’s witnesses had said and they had no ability to present mitigating evidence. Put differently, there was very limited due process in this process for those who might now be named as indictment-worthy in the final report.”
Under Georgia law, special grand juries do not have the authority to issue indictments but may recommend certain actions. In its report, the jury recommended that the district attorney “seek appropriate indictments … where the evidence is compelling.”