>

Hopefully the first of many shoes to drop!  I have faith this will lead to many indictments
When should we expect an announcement on charges vs no charges >

When Willis decides to indict she’ll need to seat a regular grand jury. If you see anything that says she’s got a regular grand jury in place it won’t be long after that. >

The special grand jury wants to publish its special presentment too. This is getting juicy. Thanks Georgia! >

Time to buy stock in Orville Redenbacher >

There was a made for tv movie from back in the 80s called The Day After (not to be confused with the always delightful Day After Tomorrow). It showed the consequences of a nuclear war on “average” Americans. 
I remember the Rush Limbaugh equivalents among Reagan’s cheer squad pointing out that one of the sponsors of the show was Orville Red-enbacher. 
I was like eight and I still did a Liz Lemon quality eye roll. >

I always thought that "The Day After Tomorrow" was a sequel to "The Day After", I recall someone saying it on TV, but as I can find no evidence, I must be wrong. >

No, it was a nuclear war movie. I can’t remember the director/producer, but I think the Reagan crowd called them a communist or com-symp. 
If you want to see a really good take on that genre of movie, try finding a film called Miracle Mile. >


Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney [...] has scheduled a hearing for Jan. 24 that will address what portions, if any, of that report will be released to the public.
A court filing says that the grand jury voted to recommend that its report be published.

Oooh, this could be fun! >

Why does it take so long though? Like the reports done, why do we have to wait another 2 weeks just to announce what will actually be released? >

More than likely because the judge makes that decision, and he has other cases on his schedule. >

Which is crazy because can't you fast track cases and make them higher priority over another? If so, I couldn't imagine a case taking higher priority in the state of Georgia under that judge's caseload. >

I'm totally talking out of my butthole here, but I would think giving some kind of special treatment towards the case could indicate potential special treatment for one party over another. No doubt Trump's side wants it to drag on as long as possible. The judge is supposed to be an impartial referee, and it'll be a tough sell that 2 more weeks will have any material impact. >

Conversely, two weeks isn't a lot of time to review and discuss things this large.
I've spent two months discussing a specific piece of HVAC equipment with engineers and owners and suppliers.
Two weeks seems like an appropriate rate to get everything in order, review what needs to be done, prepare whats coming next, and then announce.
Saying this now - anything but full release is skullduggery >

I’ve spent 11 months on a 30-second commercial. Meetings, phone calls, more meetings. It’s still not written. >

"This product or service is great! You should buy it!" 
Solved. >

I’m not sure “great” is the word we want, it evokes colonial notions of superiority.  I think we need to focus-group this whole section.
And… isn’t “should” a bit too strong?  Can we try a softer word?  Or maybe a stronger word.  “Must?”  “Might?”  I’ll run it by my people.
Also what colour is the font going to be?  Here’s 20 pages of brand identity rules. >

This is so spot on. :) >

was this the thing where he committed election fraud and it was recorded and the whole world heard it and the republicans still want him to be president?  he's committed so many other crimes i almost forgot about this one.  busy guy. >

If he does not face charges and or jail, with regards to this blatant and obvious attempt, to interfere in an election...then the entire Justice system is a farce.... >

I've heard some lawyers explain why of all of his cases this would be the most difficult to prosecute. Think about it. He didn't say "produce" the votes, he didn't say "or else I will... " He didn't say "if you do this for me I will do x for you." Just find the votes, and any half competent lawyer would defend how there have been audits, recounts, discovered uncounted ballots and other scenarios where vote totals have changed one way or another. Not a lot but it's all you need. 
In no way defending trump, he is a piece of garbage human being and president. But this would be an easy case to defend. >

I wonder which cases would be the easiest to get him on? The confidential materials he stole? That he could literally use to sell to our foreign adversaries? The tax charges? >

I think it was Brian Tyler Cohen asked glen Kushner that question and his answer was I believe obstruction of justice charge in the documents case. I could be wrong tho >

And this took two years!!!! >

Come on they only had a recording of him committing the crime >

They've probably just been hoping that he quietly goes away so nobody has to do anything politically unpalatable, like enforce the law. >

This is exactly my impression. Yet another finalized case to go ->DOJ -> special council -> shutdown or forgotten about
“Job done boys! keep fleecing America and never let our dirty laundry get this public again” >

This case isn't going to DOJ. It's Georgia's case, and they seem motivated to indict. Hang in there. >

Oh yeah, Georgia! They'll get him for certain!
Governor Kemp pardons Trump
...Welp. >

Nope. Georgia is one of three states where the Governor cannot grant clemency. I also don't appreciate your sarcasm. >

This case could be the most viable criminal investigation against Trump for a number of reasons:
It focuses on direct, smoking-gun evidence in Trump's hour-long phone call to Brad Raffensperger. In it, Trump not only asks for Raffensperger to "find 11,780" votes multiple times. He accuses of him of committing crimes, threatens him with legal consequences, insults him and berates him dozens of times, and is corrected on false statements in real time.
Here's a few gems:

So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.
And you are going to find that they are — which is totally illegal, it is more illegal for you than it is for them because, you know what they did and you’re not reporting it. That’s a criminal, that’s a criminal offense. And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. And that’s a big risk.
Well, under law, you’re not allowed to give faulty election results, okay? You’re not allowed to do that. And that’s what you done. This is a faulty election result. And honestly, this should go very fast. You should meet tomorrow because you have a big election coming up, and because of what you’ve done to the president — you know, the people of Georgia know that this was a scam — and because of what you’ve done to the president, a lot of people aren’t going out to vote. And a lot of Republicans are going to vote negative because they hate what you did to the president. Okay? They hate it.

As a state prosecution, it also has none of the conflict-of-interest or executive privilege hurdles that a federal prosecution has to clear. Fulton County is deep blue for a jury selection, and the charges Trump may face are exceptionally bad for him.
The DA is supposedly weighing election fraud, conspiracy, oath of office violations, racketeering and other offenses.
These are prominent figures that were subpoenaed:

Georgia's Governor  
Georgia's Attorney General  
Georgia's Lieutenant Governor  
Georgia Secretary of State  
A Georgia U.S. House Representative  
Multiple Georgia State Senators  
Multiple Georgia House Reps  
The Cobb County Elections Director  
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham  
Trump's lawyer - John Eastman  
Trump's lawyer - Rudy Giuliani  
Trump's legal adviser - Jenna Ellis  
Trump's lawyer - Boris Epshteyn

Giuliani, along with 16 Republicans in regards to a fake elector scheme are allegedly informed criminal targets. John Eastman is another interesting subject, Trump's lawyer who orchestrated the fake elector scheme and had many email correspondences that have implicated him and Trump in conspiracy as noted by a federal judge in a separate civil suit.
Last but not least, GA is one of few states where the governor does NOT have clemency power. Pardons are decided by a board, and only given retroactively - after a sentence is served.
We could see a charging decision (and subsequently indictments) by Fani Willis within weeks. >

Most of that is spot on but as I understand it Georgia has different grand juries for different purposes so the last sentence could be a bit optimistic. The special grand jury that just wrapped up only has the power to investigate and issue a report, which is what is happening now. To actually prosecute it will require another, not special, grand jury to decide so there's still another step required unfortunately >

Shouldn't take long to present to a regular grand jury. The evidence has already been procured and the report by the special grand jury will help expedite the process. >

I’m not optimistic that the people on the GJ will not be biased in favor of the potential defendant >

There are a bunch of things to worry about, but not really the GJ imo - Fulton County is deep blue, and the grand jury has a very low bar to clear with these decisions.
It only takes 12/23 jurors to recommend an indictment (not unanimous like a trial jury and conviction).
Further, voting on an indictment isn't accusing someone of guilt - it's simply saying that probable cause has been established to bring a trial.
If the DA wants to bring charges, she will almost certainly get them. >

So now, THIS is something that house republicans in DC can’t do shit about, right? >

Yeah, but I'm not sure if any Georgia Republicans can do something about this. >

Idk about GA house or senate, but it was the current GA Governor and Secretary of State who released the phone recording of Trump asking them to “find” the exact number of votes to overturn the election.  So I think they’re pretty fucking pissed at Trump right now. 
Also, his candidates keep losing US Senate elections in their state, which I’m sure is really frustrating as well. >


GA Governor and Secretary of State who released the phone recording of Trump asking them to “find” the exact number of votes to overturn the election

This reads to me as a CYA thing for those two - they saw that Trump illegally tried to get them to comply with his criminal request.  This was their way to show that they didn't want to get in trouble for it.  That's all. >

This is true, but it's also true they cannot walk it back. >

I think Brad doesn’t want to “walk it back!” No on told him he HAD TO report Trump trying to interfere, but his sense of decency didn’t allow him to bury that. Thank God for a few honest politicians with morals! I think Trump will be charged!!!👍👍👍