this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
167 points (98.8% liked)

politics

18966 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

WASHINGTON, Sept 14 (Reuters) - U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith on Thursday opposed Donald Trump’s request to remove the federal judge overseeing the criminal case accusing the former U.S. president of attempting to subvert the results of the 2020 election.

Smith, whose office is prosecuting the case against Trump, said there was "no valid basis" for U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to recuse herself from the case over prior statements she made in court that appeared to reference Trump’s responsibility for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol.

Trump, the front-runner for the Republican 2024 presidential nomination, filed a legal motion on Monday asking Chutkan to step aside from the case, arguing that her prior statements raised questions about her impartiality and would taint the proceedings.

The filing cited remarks Chutkan made at two sentencing hearings for defendants convicted of taking part in the Capitol riot, including one in which she said rioters were motivated by “blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.”

Trump has frequently criticized Chutkan on social media since she was assigned to preside over the case.

The case, which accuses Trump of three schemes to try to overturn his defeat by Democratic President Joe Biden, is one of four criminal cases facing Trump as he runs to retake the White House. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges and accused prosecutors of political motivations.

Chutkan, an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama, has strongly condemned the attack on the Capitol and has given some rioters more severe sentences than prosecutors sought.

U.S. prosecutors said Chutkan’s remarks do not clear the high legal bar that requires federal judges to remove themselves from a case. Judges typically recuse if they have a financial interest in the outcome or a personal connection to someone involved.

Chutkan will make the initial determination on whether to step aside.

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here