DISCLOSURE: Some Grand Jury thoughts on Trump election interference about to be made public
A new order from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney in the election interference case regarding Donald Trump is a win for transparency.
By the end of the week, part of the determination made by a Grand Jury, which completed its investigation last month, will become public.
Just weeks ago, the news broke that the Judge, against the preference of the Grand Jury, would not be immediately releasing the findings, noting that to do so ahead of prosecutorial decisions could be deemed prejudicial when (and if) any of the subjects of investigation face trial.
His new decision still holds back much of the report, but will release three sections.
These include the panel’s introduction and conclusion, and one section in which the concern that certain witnesses may have lied under oath.
However, while this release is a win for transparency and can help fulfill the purpose of presenting a significant concern — the apparent willingness of Trump’s allies to go to extreme lengths for his protection — it won’t name names.
McBurney explains in his ruling how a Grand Jury’s work differs from a trial, with no attorneys defending the accused, and that it falls outside due process to reveal some of this information, but that the named sections, which will become public on Thursday, don’t raise this concern specifically because the witnesses who may have lied under oath are not named.
“The judge agreed with [District Attorney Fani] Willis that releasing the full report at this time would violate due process of ‘potential future defendants’ because what was presented to the grand jury was a ‘one-sided exploration’ of what happened,” reports WaPo, “But McBurney ruled that parts of the report should be made public, including the panel’s concerns that witnesses may have lied under oath — witnesses that he said the grand jury did not identify.”
