 |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Today we found out that former President Donald Trump will not get back access to his Facebook or Instagram account ... for now. |
| In case you forgot, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all suspended Trump after his supporters attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6. |
| It's Mabinty, with your guide to social media's beef with Trump. |
The fine detail you might have missed |
| Facebook's Oversight Board upheld the social network's suspension of Trump, but urged the company to review his case in six months, which could clear the way for a return to the platform. |
| Facebook can decide to impose a suspension, permanently ban him or appeal again to the board, members of the Oversight Board said. They recommended that Facebook institute clear and proportionate policies "that promote public safety and respect freedom of expression." |
| In the ruling, the Facebook Oversight Board said Trump's comments on the day of the Capitol siege "created an environment where a serious risk of violence was possible." |
| How does Trump move forward? It'll be hard for him to raise money. |
| Facebook's decision to maintain its ban on Trump again deprives the ex-president of a long-range megaphone and an effective fundraising machine, elements that would be central to Trump-backed campaigns in the 2022 congressional races and, perhaps, the 2024 presidential race. |
| In the meantime, Trump will have to stick to written statements and media appearances to raise money and spread his messages. |
| |
More bad news for Trump |
| A federal judge blasted the Trump Justice Department for misleading the court about the nature of its internal deliberations before concluding that then-President Trump had not obstructed former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. |
| U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered the release of a 2019 legal memorandum to a government accountability group, ruling the document prepared for then-Attorney General William Barr as he prepared to issue his conclusions did not qualify as protected attorney-client communications. |
Real quick on SCOTUS |
| A majority of the Supreme Court voiced skepticism Tuesday over allowing certain low-level drug offenders to seek reduced sentences under bipartisan criminal justice legislation signed into law in 2018 by Trump. |
| The appeal stirred a debate at the nation's highest court about Congress' intent when the First Step Act permitted some offenders to seek shorter sentences but not others. The landmark law was intended to ease tough-on-crime policies that swelled prison populations and had a disproportionate impact on African American communities. |
| USA TODAY Supreme Court correspondent John Fritze explains what this means in our 5 Things podcast. |
More news to know today: |
| |
| It's a good day to learn about Cinco de Mayo's actual history. —Mabinty |
| |
| |
| |
| |
