Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: from server.eklavya.in by server.eklavya.in with LMTP id Og6JNRZZRGYlZgAAviDrCw (envelope-from <>) for <[email protected]>; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:11:26 +0530 Return-path: <> Envelope-to: [email protected] Delivery-date: Wed, 15 May 2024 12:11:27 +0530 Received: from mailnull by server.eklavya.in with local (Exim 4.96.2) id 1s78KM-0006nf-2h for [email protected]; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:11:26 +0530 X-Failed-Recipients: [email protected] Auto-Submitted: auto-replied From: Mail Delivery System <[email protected]> To: [email protected] References: <[email protected]> Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary=1715755286-eximdsn-1867785506 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender Message-Id: <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 12:11:26 +0530 --1715755286-eximdsn-1867785506 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: [email protected] host aspmx.l.google.com [64.233.170.26] SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: 550 78KIsFfIwr1If78KKsDO6B - <[email protected]> message rejected AUP#SNDR --1715755286-eximdsn-1867785506 Content-type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; server.eklavya.in Action: failed Final-Recipient: rfc822;[email protected] Status: 5.0.0 Remote-MTA: dns; aspmx.l.google.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 78KIsFfIwr1If78KKsDO6B - <[email protected]> message rejected AUP#SNDR --1715755286-eximdsn-1867785506 Content-type: message/rfc822 Return-path: <[email protected]> Received: from eklavya by server.eklavya.in with local (Exim 4.96.2) (envelope-from <[email protected]>) id 1s78KG-0006nM-24 for [email protected]; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:11:20 +0530 To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: =?utf-8?B?ZWtsYXZ5YTog0LHQu9C10LrRgdC/0YDRg9GC?= X-PHP-Script: eklavya.in/index.php/contact-us-eklavya for 146.70.111.138, 172.68.213.146 X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1009:PHPMailer.php Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 06:41:20 +0000 From: Eklavya <[email protected]> Reply-To: WalterTaw <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This is an enquiry email via https://eklavya.in/ from: WalterTaw <[email protected]> Trump asks federal appeals court to reconsider its decision largely upholding gag order <a href=https://blackspfgh3bi6im374fgl54qliir6to37txpkd6ucfiu7whfy2odid.com>blackspruty4w3j4bzyhlk24jr32wbpnfo3oyywn4ckwylo4hkcyy4yd.onion</a> ormer President Donald Trump is asking a federal appeals court to reconsider its decision earlier this month largely upholding the gag order issued against him in his federal election subversion case. Trump, in a Monday filing to the US DC Circuit Court of Appeals, asked the three-judge panel that handled the issue to either rehear it or for the issue to be considered en banc, meaning the case would be heard by the full court. Trump’s attorneys also asked the court to temporarily freeze the gag order while it considers their request for the case to be reheard. https://blackspfgh3bi6im374fgl54qliir6to37txpkd6ucfiu7whfy2odid.com зеркала блэк спрут Earlier this month, the three-judge panel said in a unanimous decision that Trump can be barred from talking about witnesses as well as prosecutors, the court staff and their family members. But the court said the gag order does not apply to comments made about special counsel Jack Smith and narrowed the prohibition Trump had regarding speaking about witnesses in the case, a change from the original gag order. “The opinion holds that President Trump must be silenced to protect trial participants from possible threats or ‘harassment’ from unrelated third parties,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in the 22-page filing. “In doing so, the opinion conflicts with decisions of the Supreme Court and other Circuits, warranting en banc consideration both to secure uniformity of this Court’s decisions and because of the question’s exceptional importance,” they wrote. --1715755286-eximdsn-1867785506--