She has them by the balls. Their grand jury premise is a sham and she's calling their bluff. I think her testimony at a grand jury would be censored and she wouldn't be able to introduce evidence. But if they charge her with a crime then she will get that opportunity. I think.
She has them by the balls. Their grand jury premise is a sham and she's calling their bluff. I think her testimony at a grand jury would be censored and she wouldn't be able to introduce evidence. But if they charge her with a crime then she will get that opportunity. I think.
This. They’re falling into a trap if they do charge her. All of her evidence about the election will then become public record as evidence.