Lindsey Graham Had Doubts About Trump’s Big Election Lie Before January 6

In the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, the results seemed self-evident: Joe Biden had won out, thanks in no small part to narrow blue margins in Arizona and Georgia. But for many Donald Trump supporters, historic fraud was afoot. These convictions, false though they were, resulted in a Republican-led pressure campaign against state figureheads like Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, who told The Washington Post at the time that he had heard from members of his own party who seemed to imply that he might somehow produce a different electoral result.

Chief among them was South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham. According to Raffensperger, Graham—who led the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time—referenced Georgia’s signature-matching law for ballots on a call, and asked “whether Raffensperger had the power to toss all mail ballots in counties found to have higher rates of nonmatching signatures,” per The Washington Post. Raffensperger later told CNN, “It was just an implication of, ‘Look hard and see how many ballots you could throw out.’” (Graham countered that he was calling Raffensperger “to find out how you could verify [voting] signatures. I never suggested that he should change votes.”)

That was in November. A month later, Graham was still peddling election misinformation on Fox News. He wouldn’t correct the record until January 6, 2021, after Trump-supporting rioters had stormed the U.S. Capitol. But according to an account in Bob Woodward and Robert Costa’s upcoming book, Peril, carried by the Post, Graham had doubts even before then. During a January 2 West Wing meeting with Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, he poured cold water on Giuliani’s promises to prove election fraud once and for all. “Give me some names,” he said, according to Woodward and Costa. “You need to put it in writing. You need to show me the evidence.”

On January 4, Giuliani responded by offering up several memos, including one entitled “Voting Irregularities, Impossibilities, and Illegalities in the 2020 General Election,” which Graham passed on to Senate Judiciary Committee lawyer Lee Holmes for vetting. According to the Post:

It was impossible for [Holmes] to tell precisely what kind of records had been used to conduct the analysis, which proved nothing conclusively, in his view. Of the more sensational claims, such as ballots from the deceased, Holmes thought it was much more likely, based on Giuliani’s own evidence, that some people had voted and then died, according to the book. He was equally unconvinced by theories about people voting twice, improper absentee ballot applications, and fraudulent ballots cast from vacant or nonexistent addresses. “Holmes could find no public records that would even allow someone to reach these conclusions,” according to the account in Peril.

Ultimately, Holmes “found the sloppiness, the overbearing tone of certainty, and the inconsistencies disqualifying,” per Woodward and Costa. Graham shared his viewpoint, privately mocking Giuliani’s arguments as “third grade” level. (A spokesperson for Graham declined to comment to the Post on the episode.)

— How a Deadly Crash Upended South Dakota Politics
— Matt Gaetz Tries to Shift the Narrative With a MAGA Romance
— Sebastian Junger on How the U.S. Corrupted Afghanistan
— Rudy Giuliani Is One Week Away From Waxing His Back in a Sweetgreen
— New York Prosecutors Are Full Steam Ahead to Take Down the Trump Organization
— How Turf Wars Mucked Up America’s Exit From Afghanistan
— Biden’s COVID-19 Origins Report Leaves the Lab Leak on the Table
— Governor Kristi Noem Joins Fellow Republicans in Quest to Kill Constituents
— From the Archive: The Man in the Window
— Not a subscriber? Join Vanity Fair to receive full access to VF.com and the complete online archive now.