We finally got the Georgia special grand jury report on 2020 election interference in the state. Here are some quick takeaways.

• LONG list. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ 19-defendant racketeering indictment is sprawling, no doubt, but the special grand jury wanted to charge even more people who weren’t charged by the regular grand jury that returned last month’s indictment. Many more people, in fact, including some notable names such as Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, former Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler of Georgia, conservative lawyer Cleta Mitchell, former Trump White House adviser Michael Flynn, and Donald Trump aide Boris Epshteyn, among others. 

• Open questions. We don’t know why these people weren’t charged, so in some respects, the report raises more questions than it answers, and this bombshell list of names is one instance of that. Did any of these un-indicted people cooperate at all with the authorities to help themselves? Are they all still out of the woods in terms of criminal exposure, whether they’ve cooperated or not? Did Willis simply disagree with the special grand jurors that there’s a viable case against some or all of these people? Time may tell, though we shouldn’t bank on additions to Willis’ already sprawling racketeering case.
• Details. We learned not only the bottom line of which people the special grand jury wanted charged, but the full report also contains a detailed breakdown of how many grand jurors wanted to charge each potential defendant for each crime (with a tally for “yea,” “nay” and “abstain” for each crime and person). For example, several charges against Trump listed almost all “yea” votes and a single “nay” vote, with some abstentions.
• Trial preview. The full report may prove insightful, even if only to a limited degree, for both the prosecution and the defense as they litigate the resulting 19-defendant indictment. For example, if more grand jurors thought one person was more culpable for a particular crime than another, or thought a particular defendant was more culpable for some charges than others, then those tallies could suggest areas for prosecutors to strengthen their case ahead of trial and, conversely, for defense lawyers to exploit during trial. Notably on this score, there was some explanation in footnotes, for example, with the two dissenting grand jurors noting they believed the “alternate” electors shouldn’t be indicted for doing what they were misled to understand was their civic duty.
• Step back. On the subject of trial, it’s worth remembering the lower standard that applies in the grand jury, where any resulting indictments are essentially accusations that crimes occurred. Such accusations need to be proven at trial (though more often are resolved by plea). As trial lawyers and observers know, it’s easier to make accusations than to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt. We may learn soon whether that first batch of defendants who’ve actually been indicted will meet that fate, with Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell headed toward trial next month.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.