Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

As impeachment trial starts, Georgia opens inquiry into Trump's infamous call

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger

The office of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger initiated an investigation of Donald Trump in response to a formal complaint filed by a law professor.

Paras Griffin/Getty Images

The office of Georgia's secretary of state has launched the first known investigation of former President Donald Trump for potentially committing a state election crime.

The announcement revives the question of whether Trump broke the law when he telephoned Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and asked him to "find" enough votes to reverse his loss of the state.

That incident dominated the nation's attention for only a few days — until the mob invasion of the Capitol, which has led to the Senate impeachment trial that opened Tuesday afternoon, on the even more astonishing charge that a sitting president had incited an insurrection.


A spokesman for Raffensperger, Walter Jones, said Monday that the office was acting as required in response to a formal complaint. "The investigations are fact-finding and administrative in nature. Any further legal efforts will be left to the attorney general," he said.

The usual intermediate step in Georgia is for the secretary of state to refer any findings to the Republican-controlled State Election Board, which may dismiss cases, levy fines or refer cases to the attorney general's office for potential prosecution. There is no deadline, and there's no chance the board will take action when it meets Wednesday.

Fani Willis, the Democratic district attorney of Fulton County (which covers much of Atlanta), has signaled she is weighing whether to begin a separate criminal inquiry.

The Jan. 2 call was one of several attempts by Trump to persuade top Republican officials to locate sufficient instances or even allegations of voting fraud to reverse or at least cast doubt on his 12,000-vote defeat in Georgia. That margin was certified after three different statewide tallies, and both Raffensperger and Gov. Brian Kemp said they were confident the results were clean.

On the call, Raffensperger told Trump the "data you have is wrong" as he rebutted the president's false claims that he had won Georgia's 16 electoral votes and kept alive a winning streak for the GOP nominee begun in 1996.

The complaint that prompted the preliminary criminal inquiry was filed by George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf III.

Trump's vigorous effort to reverse the outcome in Georgia — which he did not match anywhere else, and which even if successful would still have put him well short of a second term — may have violated at least three of the state's statutes. Criminal solicitation to commit election fraud and conspiracy to commit an election crime can both be prosecuted as felonies, while it is a misdemeanor to commit "intentional interference" with another's "performance of election duties."


Read More

​President Donald Trump and other officials in the Oval office.

President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026, in Washington, before signing a spending bill that will end a partial shutdown of the federal government.

Alex Brandon, Associated Press

Trump Signs Substantial Foreign Aid Bill. Why? Maybe Kindness Was a Factor

Sometimes, friendship and kindness accomplish much more than threats and insults.

Even in today’s Washington.

Keep ReadingShow less
Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

General view of Galileo Ferraris Ex Nuclear Power Plant on February 3, 2024 in Trino Vercellese, Italy. The former "Galileo Ferraris" thermoelectric power plant was built between 1991 and 1997 and opened in 1998.

Getty Images, Stefano Guidi

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

With the rise of artificial intelligence and a rapidly growing need for data centers, the U.S. is looking to exponentially increase its domestic energy production. One potential route is through nuclear energy—a form of clean energy that comes from splitting atoms (fission) or joining them together (fusion). Nuclear energy generates energy around the clock, making it one of the most reliable forms of clean energy. However, the U.S. has seen a decrease in nuclear energy production over the past 60 years; despite receiving 64 percent of Americans’ support in 2024, the development of nuclear energy projects has become increasingly expensive and time-consuming. Conversely, nuclear energy has achieved significant success in countries like France and China, who have heavily invested in the technology.

In the U.S., nuclear plants represent less than one percent of power stations. Despite only having 94 of them, American nuclear power plants produce nearly 20 percent of all the country’s electricity. Nuclear reactors generate enough electricity to power over 70 million homes a year, which is equivalent to about 18 percent of the electricity grid. Furthermore, its ability to withstand extreme weather conditions is vital to its longevity in the face of rising climate change-related weather events. However, certain concerns remain regarding the history of nuclear accidents, the multi-billion dollar cost of nuclear power plants, and how long they take to build.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less