192
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
192 points (99.0% liked)
politics
18601 readers
4106 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The federal judge overseeing former President Trump’s classified documents case granted his request to delay a few deadlines further so prosecutors can evaluate the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
Trump’s lawyers on Friday asked Judge Aileen Cannon for permission to file more documents to argue that the former president should be immune from prosecution in the case.
Trump’s lawyers say the recent Supreme Court decision that grants presidents protections for official acts should apply to the case, in which he is accused of mishandling classified records and attempting to obstruct the government from retrieving them after he was out of office.
His lawyers also noted Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in the Supreme Court decision, where he questioned special counsel Jack Smith’s motivations and authority.
Smith argued that fallout from the Supreme Court decision doesn’t apply to the documents case because he has not charged Trump over any official acts.
Cannon was criticized after she suspended the start date of the trial indefinitely after saying she needed more time to examine pretrial motions filed by Trump’s team asking her to toss the case.
The original article contains 350 words, the summary contains 182 words. Saved 48%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!