politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 6 months ago

Judge rejects Trump request to hold Jack Smith in contempt in election interference case

www.nbcnews.com

220

Judge rejects Trump request to hold Jack Smith in contempt in election interference case

www.nbcnews.com

MicroWave@lemmy.world to

politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 6 months ago

Earlier this month, attorneys for Trump asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to hold Smith in contempt for filing motions ahead of deadlines.

Earlier this month, attorneys for Trump asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to hold Smith in contempt for filing motions ahead of deadlines.

The judge overseeing the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump has rejected his request to hold special counsel Jack Smith and his office in contempt.

Earlier this month, attorneys for Trump asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to hold Smith in contempt for filing motions while the case is stayed pending Trump’s appeal on presidential immunity grounds.

Chat

SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
arrow-up
49
arrow-down
1·
6 months ago
How dare the prosecution file motions BEFORE a deadline! What do they think they are?!?!? Professionals?!?!???!? I demand they be held in contemp your honor!

politics @lemmy.world

politics@lemmy.world

Create a post

You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@lemmy.world

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!
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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News