Georgia grand jury delivers 10 indictments in Trump election probe

• A grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, on Monday decided to issue 10 indictments
• The indictments mark the culmination of Fanni Willis' 2.5-year investigation into efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn Biden's victory in the state
• Trump facing three indictments: one, on federal charges relating to election interference; another for classified documents, and one for hush money

The charges are not yet known, and it is unclear how many people have been indicted or who they are. 

Fani Willis, the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia, is yet to officially announce the charges, but the indictment was confirmed by court officials. The grand jury was investigating the efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in the state where Joe Biden narrowly beat Donald Trump. 

Trump already faces prosecution in Manhattan on state charges of campaign finance violations

He also faces federal charges in connection to the handling of classified documents and a separate case related to trying to obstruct the 2020 election. 

On Monday morning Trump argued he did not tamper with the election and that he would 'be happy' to talk to the grand jury that has been meeting this week in Fulton County.

'Would someone tell the Fulton County grand jury that I did not tamper with the election,' he wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Earlier Monday, the Fulton County court posted a list of 13 possible 2020 election tampering charges against Trump on its website - then hastily removed it.

Trump's attorneys put out a statement on Monday afternoon criticizing the Atlanta DA's office, saying they have 'no respect for the integrity of the grand jury process.'

'This was not a simple administrative mistake. A proposed indictment should only be in the hands of the District Attorney's Office, yet it somehow made its way to the clerk's office and was assigned a case number and a judge before the grand jury even deliberated,' his team said. 

'This is emblematic of the pervasive and glaring constitutional violations which have plagued this case from its very inception.'