Member of Trump-Targeting Georgia Grand Jury Speaks Out, Destroys Credibility of the Case


A member of the Georgia grand jury that was formed to target Donald Trump and his associates over supposed election crimes during 2020 is speaking out. Emily Kohrs gave an “exclusive” interview to NBC News before also rushing to blab to CNN, making the exclusive interview not so exclusive.

What we got from those appearances was the commentary of someone who comes across as immature and fame-seeking, which makes the press’ treatment of her “revelations” as a serious matter all the more farcical. No doubt, Trump’s lawyers are salivating over this.

I’m not sure if she’s just really nervous or if she actually has the personality of a teenage girl, but nothing about this makes the grand jury in Georgia look good or credible. Instead, it makes the process look like a joke, propagated by people desperately pushing a political fight in the legal arena. This was the kind of person that was allowed onto the grand jury? What’s that say about the prosecution’s pursuit as a whole? The answer is nothing good.

As to what Kohrs says, there’s nothing especially ground-breaking, but it’s how she says it that is most noteworthy. For one, it may be illegal for her to discuss these grand jury deliberations. At best, she’s attempting to toe a line that she appears to have crossed multiple times. To give an example, she says the list of indictments is very long. She also says at the end of the CNN clip, which I’ll post below, that Trump was mentioned a lot in the proceedings. There are several other breaches in the clips as well.

Secondly, she just comes across as a self-promoting grifter. She giggles incessantly, gives silly teases, and generally makes even the leftist “reporters” interviewing her look uncomfortable. It’s terrible optics if the goal was to make the process seem serious and unbiased.

In fact, her performance was so worrying and self-defeating (if your goal is to “get” Trump) that even some on the left are showing consternation over it.


If the prosecutors pursuing this want to salvage their case, they’ll explore charging Kohrs if she indeed did break the law in revealing what she revealed. To not do so would be an admission they are focused solely on political goals.

Lastly, I think what Kohrs says also gives credence to the old adage that you can indict a ham sandwich (though, these are “recommended indictments,” not required to be acted on). In the CNN interview, she says that the list of recommended indictments is over 12. Ask yourself, what happened in Georgia in 2020 that would justify 12 indictments? That just seems laughable on its face given all the details we know of the situation, and the claim just further underscores the political nature of the case. I’d bet any defense attorney worth his salt is going to have a field day in court if prosecutors take the next step.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *