this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
481 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2781 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

Mr Trump received an additional charge of wilful retention of defence information, and two new charges of obstruction, the justice department said.

An additional person, Mar-a-Lago staff member Carlos de Oliveira, has also been indicted in the case.

Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty.

Mr Trump's aide Walt Nauta - who has similarly entered a not guilty plea - also received two additional counts of obstruction.

The new court documents outline alleged efforts between Mr Nauta and Mr de Oliviera, the property manager at Mar-a-Lago, to obstruct the justice department's investigation.

According to the new court documents, Mr Nauta and Mr de Oliveira conspired to delete footage from security cameras after the Department of Justice issued a subpoena asking for surveillance footage of the basement where it said confidential documents were held.

In the court documents, Mr de Oliveira is claimed to have texted another employee who was the director of information technology that "the boss" wanted the server deleted.

The documents allege that Mr de Oliveira later met with the employee in a small room, told him them their conversation should remain private, then pressured the man into obliging his request after the employee told Mr de Oliveira that he did not have the authority.

"What are we going to do," Mr de Oliveira allegedly asked his co-worker. A lawyer for Mr de Oliveira has declined to comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm not celebrating until he actually has repercussions.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago

What can I say? I'm a lush. 🤷🏽‍♂️

[–] yata 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, this is the millionth article with the same sort of headline these last 7 years, and we have yet to see just the slightest hint of any actual repercussions for his life of crime.