The judge declined to halt the Fulton County district attorney’s investigation into 2020 election interference.

A state judge in Georgia has rejected Donald Trump’s bid to derail his potential prosecution for attempting to subvert the 2020 election results.

In a nine-page ruling, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney said it’s simply too soon for Trump or his allies to seek to prohibit Georgia prosecutors from continuing to investigate him — in large part because he hasn’t been indicted yet.

“[W]hile being the subject (or even target) of a highly publicized criminal investigation is likely an unwelcome and unpleasant experience, no court ever has held that that status alone provides a basis for the courts to interfere with or halt the investigation,” wrote McBurney, who spent a year overseeing District Attorney Fani Willis’ special grand jury investigation of Trump’s election-related actions.

  • Granite
    link
    fedilink
    2810 months ago

    Why not bring back the divine right of kings while we’re at it? /s

    • @geekworking
      link
      1510 months ago

      The MAGA cult is already running around with King Trump signs.

      Seriously it is just completely bonkers that a scary number of people actually want to live under a dictatorship.

      • @Phlogiston
        link
        410 months ago

        Somehow they’re convinced he’s only going to hurt the “right” people.

        I too wouldn’t mind living in an absolute dictatorship if my guy (or I) was the boss. (Actually even then I think I’d feel uncomfortable; I have too much empathy for my own good).

    • @jeffwOP
      link
      1310 months ago

      Trump has already laid out a plan to expand presidential powers if he wins in ‘24, so that might not be too far off in a future GOP platform

    • flipht
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      Well, you’ve got Bill Barr’s attention.

      • yip-bonk
        link
        fedilink
        710 months ago

        Anyone seen the unredacted Mueller report yet? That we should have? Anyone? Beuller?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -210 months ago

        There you go. It is a legit term. I did not read the article. Was it just harsh words or actual consequences from the judge?

    • doc
      link
      fedilink
      010 months ago

      It means you’re supposed to have a visceral, emotional reaction that caused you to click to learn more and give them ad revenue.

      I wish this junk wasn’t commonplace but it must have been proven to work with how often it is used.