Hey folks, Joyce Vance here. We're following the latest developments in the Donald Trump cases.

In the Fulton County Georgia election interference case, the report prepared by the special purpose grand jury has been unsealed,

revealing that jurors recommended charges against Senator Lindsey Graham and other Trump allies who ultimately were not charged.

Meanwhile, a judge rejected former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows bid to transfer his state criminal charges to federal court.

And in the classified documents case, special counsel Jack Smith has secured the cooperation of a Mar-a-Lago IT worker who is now expected to testify against Trump at trial.

In still more news, former Trump advisor Peter Navarro was convicted of contempt of Congress for flouting a January 6th House committee subpoena.

Pete Barara and I discuss all that and more on the Cafe Insider podcast.

Today, we're sharing an excerpt from the episode with listeners of Stay Tuned.

To hear our full conversation and access all other Cafe Insider content, try the membership for just $1 for one month.

You can do that at cafe.com slash insider. That's cafe.com slash insider.

We look forward to having you as a part of the insider community.

So, pre-other news in Georgia, the investigative grand jury's report was finally unsealed completely.

And what that consisted of, you know, I was sort of expecting pages of narrative.

And instead, we got a list of individuals that the grand jury considered, whether there was reason to indict.

And we got the votes on each of those possible defendants, not all of whom have been indicted, notably three senators Lindsey Graham and the two Georgia senators, Republican senators who lost in the runoff election were named, but did not get full on votes. What do you make of all of it?

So, I think it's interesting. People are making a big deal of it. It doesn't really show anything. There was a particular specialized grand jury that had a lot more potential targets and defendants in their sites.

What I think it does show is, in fact, Fanny Willis at the end of the day was somewhat selective and discriminating in a good way as to who would be indicted and who would not, who they would seek an indictment against.

Notwithstanding with the special grand jury found, it's still a large indictment with a lot of people 19.

But there was the option or the opportunity and indeed the recommendation from a separate preliminary grand jury to indict a lot more folks, including those three senators that you mentioned.

So I think it's a testament, although some people are very critical of Fanny Willis, it's a testament to her restraint perhaps.

Yeah, I think that's right. I think it underscores that she did this sort of to steal your line. She did it in the right way for the right reasons.

Because, you know, this whole Georgia process, we've talked about how weird it is, special investigative grand jury and they're not the grand jury that votes on the indictments.

...